Serious comtemplation? You mean Kristeva, for instance, really, really did understand the mathematics she used. She was not really attempting to impress her rea

Serious comtemplation? You mean Kristeva, for instance, really, really did understand the mathematics she used. She was not really attempting to impress her readers with fancy words she evidently did not understand as Sokal clearly shows on page 46 of Intellectual Impostures. Dawkins put it well "Suppose you are an intellectual impostor with nothing to say, but with strong ambitions to succeed in academic life, collect a coterie of reverent disciples and have students around the world anoint your pages with respectful yellow highlighter. What kind of literary style would you cultivate? Not a lucid one, surely, for clarity would expose your lack of content. The chances are that you would produce something like the following: " And he quotes the psychoanalyst (!!) Félix Guattari "We can clearly see that there is no bi-univocal correspondence between linear signifying links or archi-writing, depending on the author, and this multireferential, multi-dimensional machinic catalysis. The symmetry of scale, the transversality, the pathic non-discursive character of their expansion: all these dimensions remove us from the logic of the excluded middle and reinforce us in our dismissal of the ontological binarism we criticised previously. "