From: Damien Broderick (d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 23:45:22 MST
At 01:19 PM 2/27/02 -0800, Richard Steven Hack wrote:
>>The complete text of Sokal's article may be found at:
>>http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_singl
efile.html
>I agree with your analysis of the French (and derivative "pomo" )
>thought. However, the point to keep in mind that some of these people DO
>have valid - to some degree, presumably - points to make and dismissing it
>all as "crap" might be premature.
Exactly.
Aaaiiiieeeee! This must be how poor Amara feels when people blather on
about cosmic dust or black holes based on what we read on the back of the
Weeties packet. I've published an entire book on this topic (the
intelligibility and worth of pomo discourse, in the light of the two
cultures rupture: THEORY AND ITS DISCONTENTS, Deakin University Press,
Australia, 1997), and it makes my teeth ache to see that vast and
consequential discursive conflict reduced to `Ya, ya, I can't understand
you so you're an idjit, you idjit.'
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:42 MST