Re: no problem
Paul Janse (PJanse@compuserve.com)
Wed, 25 Nov 1998 04:06:42 -0500
Jim, I never said the Sokal article did not have any meaning. Maybe it ha=
d.
But the editors apparently accepted the piece because of a meaning which
did not exist. Surely Sokal did not write a really good, meaningful and
interesting article by pure chance? Also, the point of his article was, I=
think, not so much the meaninglessness of words like `Lacanian', but the
meaninglessness of some philosophers' use of physical and mathematical
metaphors and concepts. I read some fragments of the kind parodied by
Sokal, and they were really horrible. I am a mathematician myself and kno=
w
something of physics. The way these 'philosophers' abuse mathematics feel=
s
like when someone carelessly throws a beautiful piece of carved wood in t=
he
fire because he feels a little cold.
Paul Janse