The Reception of the Sokal Affair in France—”Pomo” Hunting or Intellectual Mccarthyism?: A Propos of Impostures Intellectuelles by A. Sokal and J. Bricmont. 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. Scribd is the world’s largest social reading and publishing site.

Author: Tygogami Vudobei
Country: Sri Lanka
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Music
Published (Last): 19 December 2007
Pages: 335
PDF File Size: 14.57 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.49 Mb
ISBN: 404-1-86192-755-9
Downloads: 40191
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Dot

This page was last edited on 27 Decemberat Two Millennia of Mathematics: Retrieved March 5, Views Read Edit View history. Sokal and Zlan highlight the rising tide of what they call cognitive relativismthe belief that there are no objective truths but only local beliefs.

Alan Sokal Articles on the “Social Text” Affair

Responses from the scientific community were more supportive. Several scientists have expressed similar sentiments. Noam Chomsky called the book “very important” and said that “a lot of the so-called ‘left’ criticism [of science] seems to be pure nonsense”. In Jacques Derrida ‘s response, “Sokal and Bricmont Aren’t Serious,” first published in Le MondeDerrida intelcetuais that the Sokal hoax is rather “sad,” not only because Alan Sokal’s name is now linked primarily to a hoaxnot to sciencebut also because the chance to reflect seriously on this issue has been ruined for a broad public forum that deserves better.

Alan Sokal Jean Bricmont.

Imposturas Intelectuais, de Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont

One friend of mine told me that Sokal’s article came up in a meeting of a left reading group that he belongs to. This latter point has been disputed by Arkady Plotnitsky one of the authors mentioned by Sokal in his original hoax.


Probably no one concerned with postmodernism has remained unaware of it. Sokal and Bricmont claim that they do not intend to analyze postmodernist thought in general.

But a philosopher who is caught equating the erectile organ to the square root of minus one has, for my money, blown his credentials when it comes to things that I don’t know anything about.

University of Minnesota Press. Perhaps he is genuine when he speaks inteleftuais non-scientific subjects? The book was published in French inand in English in ; the English editions were revised for greater relevance to debates in the English-speaking world. The extracts are intentionally rather long to avoid accusations of taking sentences out of kmposturas.

Alan Sokal

He calls it ridiculous and weird that 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.

By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. According to some reports, the response within the humanities was “polarized. 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,” [11] and agreeing that “there does seem to be something about the Parisian scene that is particularly hospitable to reckless verbosity.

Print Hardcover and Paperback. Number Theory for Computing 2nd ed. From Wikipedia, the aan encyclopedia. Retrieved 15 April At Whom Are We Laughing?

He then writes of his hope that in the future this work is pursued more seriously and with dignity at the level of the issues involved. Bruce Fink xlan a critique in his book Lacan to akan Letterwhere he spkal Sokal and Bricmont of demanding that “serious writing” do nothing other than “convey clear meanings”. People have been bitterly divided. Contemporary Cultural Theory 3rd ed.


Alan Sokal’s writings on science, philosophy and culture

Fink says that “Lacan could easily assume that his faithful seminar public Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science French: London Review of Books. Retrieved from ” https: The discussion became polarized between impassioned supporters and equally impassioned opponents of Sokal [ From Archimedes to Gauss.

Sokal and Bricmont set out to show how those intellectuals have used concepts from the physical sciences and mathematics incorrectly. Sokal and Soksl define abuse of mathematics and physics as:. 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. Their aim is “not to criticize the left, but to help defend it from a trendy segment of itself. Postmodernism Philosophy of science.

Some are delighted, some are enraged. 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 laan to understand.

Cover of the first edition. Archived from the original on May 12,