<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Three cheers for Alan Sokal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/05/three-cheers-for-alan-sokal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/05/three-cheers-for-alan-sokal/</link>
	<description>Logic, enthusiasms, sceptical thoughts, and a little LaTeX geekery</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:23:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: sciencedefeated</title>
		<link>http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/05/three-cheers-for-alan-sokal/comment-page-1/#comment-406</link>
		<dc:creator>sciencedefeated</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logicmatters.net/?p=288#comment-406</guid>
		<description>A very good Noam Chomsky quote.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A very good Noam Chomsky quote.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Cartesian</title>
		<link>http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/05/three-cheers-for-alan-sokal/comment-page-1/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>A Cartesian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 15:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logicmatters.net/?p=288#comment-313</guid>
		<description>I do think Sokal&#039;s smug, though it&#039;s not always evident in his writing, but &quot;smug&quot; was only one word in my post, and nothing else I wrote turns on it.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Chomsky has a disagreement similar to Sokal&#039;s with postmodernist and the like,   and sees the problem with such views in similar &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1995----02.htm&quot; REL=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;political&lt;/a&gt; terms:&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;i&gt;It strikes me as remarkable that their left counterparts today should seek to deprive oppressed people not only of the joys of understanding and insight, but also of tools of emancipation, informing us that the &quot;project of the Enlightenment&quot; is dead, that we must abandon the &quot;illusions&quot; of science and rationality--a message that will gladden the hearts of the powerful, delighted to monopolize these instruments for their own use.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;His praise for Sokal&#039;s analysis is such as would naturally accompany agreement, as would your &quot;good sense&quot; and amused reaction to his description of the Pope.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;But Chomsky uses words such as &quot;sober&quot;, &quot;informed&quot; and &quot;careful&quot;, there&#039;s nothing about &lt;i&gt;verve&lt;/i&gt; ... or originality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do think Sokal&#8217;s smug, though it&#8217;s not always evident in his writing, but &#8220;smug&#8221; was only one word in my post, and nothing else I wrote turns on it.</p>
<p>Chomsky has a disagreement similar to Sokal&#8217;s with postmodernist and the like,   and sees the problem with such views in similar <a HREF="http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1995----02.htm" REL="nofollow">political</a> terms:</p>
<p><i>It strikes me as remarkable that their left counterparts today should seek to deprive oppressed people not only of the joys of understanding and insight, but also of tools of emancipation, informing us that the &#8220;project of the Enlightenment&#8221; is dead, that we must abandon the &#8220;illusions&#8221; of science and rationality&#8211;a message that will gladden the hearts of the powerful, delighted to monopolize these instruments for their own use.</i></p>
<p>His praise for Sokal&#8217;s analysis is such as would naturally accompany agreement, as would your &#8220;good sense&#8221; and amused reaction to his description of the Pope.  </p>
<p>But Chomsky uses words such as &#8220;sober&#8221;, &#8220;informed&#8221; and &#8220;careful&#8221;, there&#8217;s nothing about <i>verve</i> &#8230; or originality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/05/three-cheers-for-alan-sokal/comment-page-1/#comment-309</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 20:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logicmatters.net/?p=288#comment-309</guid>
		<description>Tedious and smug? Smug?? A very odd reading of Sokal&#039;s tone. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I think I prefer Chomsky&#039;s assessment &quot;Sokal&#039;s analysis is sober and incisive, deeply informed over an impressive range, lucid and careful&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tedious and smug? Smug?? A very odd reading of Sokal&#8217;s tone. </p>
<p>I think I prefer Chomsky&#8217;s assessment &#8220;Sokal&#8217;s analysis is sober and incisive, deeply informed over an impressive range, lucid and careful&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Cartesian</title>
		<link>http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/05/three-cheers-for-alan-sokal/comment-page-1/#comment-306</link>
		<dc:creator>A Cartesian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 14:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logicmatters.net/?p=288#comment-306</guid>
		<description>I find Sokal tedious and smug, and it&#039;s depressing to see that he&#039;s still milking his moment of notoriety.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Sokal&#039;s already reprinted &quot;Transgressing the boundaries&quot; in at least one book, and I&#039;m dismayed to find that, counting the annotated &quot;Transgressing&quot;, the first 170 or so pages of this new book are about the &lt;i&gt;Social Text&lt;/i&gt; affair. &lt;i&gt;*sigh*&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Like many other people with a science background, though not purely science in my case, I thought what Sokal had done was interesting (and fun!) at first, and so I bought one of his other books, only to find that he didn&#039;t actually have anything very interesting to say.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;From what I&#039;d seen of &lt;i&gt;Beyond the Hoax,&lt;/i&gt; it looked no better.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Still, to test that, I have just tried reading his discussion of Feyerabend that starts  on page 197.  Unfortunately, it is indeed extraordinarily dull, shows little insight into PKF&#039;s thinking, and says nothing of significance that I haven&#039;t seen more than once before.  (And I don&#039;t mean in his other books!)  Looking at other pages, more or less at random, confirms this view.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;One reason I read your blog is because of the books you mention, and you have led me to some good ones; but I am going to give this one a miss.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find Sokal tedious and smug, and it&#8217;s depressing to see that he&#8217;s still milking his moment of notoriety.</p>
<p>Sokal&#8217;s already reprinted &#8220;Transgressing the boundaries&#8221; in at least one book, and I&#8217;m dismayed to find that, counting the annotated &#8220;Transgressing&#8221;, the first 170 or so pages of this new book are about the <i>Social Text</i> affair. <i>*sigh*</i></p>
<p>Like many other people with a science background, though not purely science in my case, I thought what Sokal had done was interesting (and fun!) at first, and so I bought one of his other books, only to find that he didn&#8217;t actually have anything very interesting to say.</p>
<p>From what I&#8217;d seen of <i>Beyond the Hoax,</i> it looked no better.</p>
<p>Still, to test that, I have just tried reading his discussion of Feyerabend that starts  on page 197.  Unfortunately, it is indeed extraordinarily dull, shows little insight into PKF&#8217;s thinking, and says nothing of significance that I haven&#8217;t seen more than once before.  (And I don&#8217;t mean in his other books!)  Looking at other pages, more or less at random, confirms this view.  </p>
<p>One reason I read your blog is because of the books you mention, and you have led me to some good ones; but I am going to give this one a miss.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

