Imposturas Intelectuais (Alan Sokal & Jean Bricmont). 2 likes. Book. The Reception of the Sokal Affair in France—”Pomo” Hunting or Intellectual Mccarthyism?: A Propos of Impostures Intellectuelles by A. Sokal and J. Bricmont. Back to Alan Sokal’s Physics Department Page (see also old page) .. , Trimestre 2, ); Review of Imposturas Intelectuais, by Sara.

Author: Kami Dalmaran
Country: Eritrea
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Software
Published (Last): 28 April 2015
Pages: 407
PDF File Size: 17.42 Mb
ePub File Size: 20.28 Mb
ISBN: 679-6-78076-531-3
Downloads: 39845
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mukazahn

This page was last edited on 27 Decemberat Two Millennia of Mathematics: Limiting her considerations to physics, science hystorian Mara Beller [14] 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.

University of Minnesota Press. He suggests there are plenty of scientists who have pointed out the difficulty of attacking his response. They also suggest 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.

Bruce Fink offers a critique in his book Lacan to the Letterwhere he accuses Sokal and Bricmont of demanding that “serious writing” do nothing other than “convey clear meanings”.

Alan Sokal

Sokal is best known for the Sokal Affairin which he submitted a deliberately absurd article imposturss to Social Texta critical theory journal, and was able to get it published. 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 sokxl gibberish,” [11] and agreeing that “there does seem to be something about the Parisian scene that is particularly hospitable to reckless verbosity.


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. Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science Cover of the first edition. Probably no one concerned with postmodernism has remained unaware of it. But a philosopher who is caught equating the erectile organ ikposturas the square root of minus one has, for sokwl money, blown his credentials when it comes to things that I don’t know anything about.

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.

Cover of the first edition.

Some are delighted, some are enraged. Lacan to the Letter. Responses from the scientific community were more supportive. This latter point has been disputed by Arkady Plotnitsky one of the authors mentioned by Sokal in his original hoax. In Jacques Derrida ‘s response, “Sokal and Bricmont Aren’t Serious,” first published in Le MondeDerrida writes 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.

One friend of mine told me that Sokal’s article came up in a meeting of a left reading group that he belongs to. The extracts are intentionally rather long to avoid accusations of taking sentences out of context.

intelfctuais From Archimedes to Gauss. According to some reports, the response within the humanities was “polarized. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Postmodernism Philosophy of science. The Knowable and the Unknowable. 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.


Carlos Veloso (Translator of Imposturas Intelectuais)

University of Michigan Press. The book has been criticized by post-modern philosophers and by scholars with some interest in continental philosophy. Sokal and Bricmont set out to show how those intellectuals have used concepts from the physical sciences and mathematics incorrectly. Sokal and Bricmont claim that they do not intend to analyze postmodernist thought in intdlectuais.

Number Theory for Computing 2nd ed. However, with regard to the second sense, which Plotnisky describes by stating that “all imaginary and complex numbers are, by definition, irrational,” [24] mathematicians agree with Sokal and Bricmont in not taking complex numbers as irrational.

Retrieved 15 April Archived from the original on May 12, Retrieved 25 June They argue that soal 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. The book gives a chapter to each of the above-mentioned authors, “the tip of the iceberg” of a group of intellectual practices that can be described as “mystification, deliberately obscure language, confused thinking and the misuse of scientific concepts.

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.

Perhaps he is genuine when he speaks of non-scientific subjects? Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science French:

Previous post: