Sokal y J. No pretendemos con ello invalidar el resto de su obra, punto en el que suspendemos nuestro juicio. No se critica a la izquierda, se la ayuda a defenderse de ciertos "tendencias a la moda". Manipular frases sin sentido. Luego sobre estos autores Lo peor es que muchas veces se oye que tales elucubraciones han quedado "demostradas": "Fulano ha demostrado que
|Published (Last):||22 July 2017|
|PDF File Size:||6.26 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.45 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Incorrect use of scientific concepts versus scientific metaphors[ edit ] The stated goal of the book is not to attack "philosophy, the humanities or the social sciences in general Sokal and Bricmont set out to show how those intellectuals have used concepts from the physical sciences and mathematics incorrectly.
The extracts are intentionally rather long to avoid accusations of taking sentences out of context. Sokal and Bricmont claim that they do not intend to analyze postmodernist thought in general. Rather, they aim to draw attention to the abuse of concepts from mathematics and physics, their areas of specialty. Sokal and Bricmont define abuse of mathematics and physics as any of the following behaviors: Using scientific or pseudoscientific terminology without bothering much about technical meanings.
Importing concepts from the natural sciences into the humanities without justification for their use. Displaying superficial erudition by using technical terms where they are irrelevant, presumably to impress and intimidate non-specialist readers. Manipulating meaningless words and phrases. Self-assurance on topics far beyond the competence of the author and exploiting the prestige of science to give discourses a veneer of rigor.
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.
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. Their aim is "not to criticize the left, but to help defend it from a trendy segment of itself. Richard Dawkins , in a review of this book, said regarding the discussion of Lacan : "We do not need the mathematical expertise of Sokal and Bricmont to assure us that the author of this stuff is a fake.
Perhaps he is genuine when he speaks of non-scientific subjects? Bruce Fink offers a critique in his book Lacan to the Letter, where he accuses Sokal and Bricmont of demanding that "serious writing" do nothing other than "convey clear meanings".
Fink says that "Lacan could easily assume that his faithful seminar public
Sobre las imposturas intelectuales. ALAN SOKAL: ¿LA INSUFICIENCIA DE PRUEBAS?