The Reception of the Sokal Affair in France—”Pomo” Hunting or Intellectual Mccarthyism?: A Propos of Impostures Intellectuelles by A. Sokal and J. Bricmont. Imposturas Intelectuais (Alan Sokal & Jean Bricmont). 2 likes. Book. Papers by Alan Sokal on the “Social Text Affair”; Sokal-Bricmont book . São Paulo, Jornal de Resenhas, 11 abril ); “Descomposturas intelectuais”, ” Imposturas e fantasias”, by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont (Folha de.
|Published (Last):||25 June 2007|
|PDF File Size:||2.3 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.86 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Number Theory for Computing 2nd ed. Perhaps he is genuine when he speaks of non-scientific subjects?
He calls it ridiculous and weird itelectuais there are intensities of treatment by the scientists, in particular, that he was “much less badly treated,” when in fact he was the main target of the US press. According to New York Review of Books editor Barbara Epsteinalxn was delighted by Sokal’s hoaxwithin the humanities the response to the book was bitterly divided, with some delighted and some enraged;  in some reading groupsreaction was polarized between impassioned supporters and equally impassioned opponents of Sokal.
He takes Sokal and Bricmont to task for elevating a disagreement with Lacan’s choice of writing styles to an attack on his thought, which, in Fink’s assessment, they fail to understand. Limiting her considerations to physics, science hystorian Mara Beller  maintained that it was not entirely fair to blame contemporary postmodern philosophers for drawing nonsensical conclusions from quantum physics which they did dosince many such conclusions were drawn by some of the leading quantum physicists themselves, such as Bohr or Heisenberg when they ventured into philosophy.
Archived from the original on May 12, Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Skoal Cover of the first edition. They argue that this view is held by a number of people, including people who the authors label “postmodernists” and the Strong Programme in the sociology of science, and that it is illogical, impractical, and dangerous. Retrieved 25 June They also impsturas that, in criticising Irigaray, Sokal and Bricmont sometimes go beyond their area of expertise in the sciences and simply express a differing position on gender politics.
Sokal and Bricmont claim that they do not intend to analyze postmodernist thought in general. From Archimedes to Gauss.
University of Minnesota Press. London Review of Books. While Fink and Plotnitsky question Sokal and Bricmont’s right to say what definitions of scientific terms are correct, cultural theorists and literary critics Andrew Milner and Jeff Browitt acknowledge that right, seeing it as “defend[ing] their disciplines against what they saw as a misappropriation of key terms and concepts” by writers such as Lacan and Irigaray.
Retrieved 15 April The Knowable and the Unknowable. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Imposturas Intelectuais, de Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont
Two Millennia of Mathematics: At Whom Are We Laughing? Event occurs at 3: The extracts are intentionally rather long to avoid accusations of taking sentences out of context. Print Hardcover and Paperback.
Cover of the first edition. University of Michigan Press. According to some reports, the response within the humanities was “polarized.
Imposturas Intelectuais, de Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont – DisputatioDisputatio
Sokal and Bricmont set out to show how those intellectuals have used concepts from the physical sciences and mathematics incorrectly. The discussion became polarized between impassioned supporters and equally impassioned opponents of Sokal [ Sokal and Bricmont highlight the rising tide of what they call cognitive relativismthe belief that there are no objective truths but only local beliefs.
One friend of mine told me that Sokal’s article came up in a meeting of a left reading group that he belongs to.
Probably no one concerned with postmodernism has remained unaware of it. The book has been criticized by post-modern philosophers and by scholars with some interest in continental philosophy. The philosopher Thomas Nagel has supported Sokal and Bricmont, describing their book as consisting largely of “extensive quotations of scientific gibberish from name-brand French intellectuals, together with eerily patient explanations of why it is gibberish,”  and agreeing that “there does seem to be something about the Parisian scene that is particularly hospitable to reckless verbosity.
Alan Sokal Articles on the “Social Text” Affair
Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science French: But a philosopher who is caught equating the erectile organ to the square root of miposturas one has, for my money, blown his credentials when it comes to things that I don’t know anything about. This latter point has been disputed by Arkady Plotnitsky one of the authors mentioned by Sokal in his original hoax.
Rather, they aim to draw attention to the abuse of concepts from mathematics and physics, subjects they’ve devoted their careers to studying and teaching.
This page was last edited nitelectuais 27 Decemberat Some are delighted, some are enraged. Lacan to the Letter.