3 ms·
It is funny that of these three names, two were among the four explicitly exempted by Sokal and Bricmont of being impostors in a 1997 letter to Liberation follo
by chalst 7y ago
It is funny that of these three names, two were among the four explicitly exempted by Sokal and Bricmont of being impostors in a 1997 letter to Liberation following publication of the book: "Famous thinkers like Althusser, Barthes, Derrida, and Foucault are mainly absent from our book"
Orig. https://next.liberation.fr/livres/1997/10/18/sokal-et-bricmont-s-etonnent-du-tolle-suscite-en-france-par-impostures-intellectuelles-qui-s-attaque_217100 https://next.liberation.fr/livres/1997/10/18/sokal-et-bricmo....
Cf. http://www.critical-theory.com/read-derridas-response-sokal-affair/ http://www.critical-theory.com/read-derridas-response-sokal-...
- yesenadam 7y agoI don't think it's fair to say they were "explicitly exempted of being impostors" - Intellectual Impostures focuses exclusively on the use of scientific and mathematical terms by philosophers, as it's often clearly evident when an author doesn't know what they mean, and/or is using them in a totally absurd way. It's easier to catch them in the act of perpetrating nonsense. The four you mentioned just don't happen to use mathematical or scientific terms in the same egregiously nonsensical way. That is very far from the only way of writing bad philosophy. For some of the many others, see David Stove's What is wrong with our thoughts? (which, by the way, features Foucault) http://www.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/wrongthoughts.html http://www.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/wrongthoughts.html