User:VermillionBird/Fashionable Nonsense is not a scholarly work
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is very much a work in progress. It is intended to eventually become a Wikipedia reference article (not an actual Wikipedia article) that will, ideally, eventually lead to the support of the viewpoint that the Sokal hoax and the book Fashionable Nonsense are, while popular, not notable to the subjects that they intend to criticize.
[edit] Overview
Alan Sokal is a physicist at New York University. He perpetrated a hoax involving an article submitted to the journal Social Text and subsequently published a book with Jean Bricmont titled Fashionable Nonsense.
The authors feel that both the hoax and the book are serious and damning criticism of what they refer to as Postmodernism and people they refer to as Postmodernists.
In the context of Wikipedia, it is the cause of misinformation being placed into articles.
[edit] Why this article?
Why should we spend this much time to compile all this instead of just making the changes?
There seems to be a dedicated group of users who feel that the issue is a serious and valuable critcism of a nebulous idea they are referring to as Postmodernism. One user alone would not be able to defend the various pages against their agressive insertion of references to the topic or influence uninvolved public opinion.
[edit] What this article is for?
This article is intended to be a repository of information and arguements for users defending the various Wikipedia articles against the misinformed users.
In addition, this article is hoped to be a source of factual information in the seemingly unavoidable arbitration that will, the voice of reason hopes, lead to the appropriate valuation of the topic in this encyclopedia.
[edit] What to do with this article?
Please edit this page to:
- Add information and reasoning
- Improve accuracy and style
- Democratize the content
- Update changing information
[edit] What to do if you disagree with this article?
This is not a Wikipedia article. It is a meta-article devoted to a specific topic.
The authors of this article are aware that there are Wikipedia users who disagree with the content of this page. This article attempts to be as factual as possible. If you disagree with this article, it is likely that you disagree with specific factual statements made in the article.
Rather than disputing or modifying this meta-article, please create a separate meta-article that supports the notability of the topic. This will allow impartial third parties to evaluate the claims fairly.
In addition, discussion can be carried out on the discussion page of the article.
[edit] Counter-example
TBD
[edit] The hoax
TBD
[edit] Transgressing the Boundaries:
Toward a Transformative Hermenuetics of Quantum Gravity
TBD
[edit] The book
TBD
[edit] General notes
TBD
[edit] Summary
TBD
[edit] Preface to the English Edition
TBD
[edit] 1. Introduction
TBD
[edit] 2. Jacques Lacan
TBD
[edit] 3. Julia Kristeva
TBD
[edit] 4. Intermezzo:
Epistemic Relativism in the Philosophy of Science
[edit] 5. Luce Irigaray
TBD
[edit] 6. Bruno Latour
TBD
[edit] 7. Intermezzo:
Chaos Theory and "Postmodern Science"
[edit] 8. Jean Baudrillard
TBD
[edit] 9. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari
TBD
[edit] 10. Paul Virilio
TBD
[edit] 11. Godel's Theorem and Set Theory:
Some Examples of Abuse
[edit] 12. Epilogue
TBD
[edit] Agenda
TBD
[edit] Links
This is a list of articles related to the topic and articles that contain references to the topic. It was last updated by VermillionBird 01:14, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)
[edit] Authors' articles
These are the authors that Sokal and Bricmont excerpt in the book (Lacan, Kristeva, Irigaray, Latour, Baudrillard, Deleuze and Guattari, and Virilio) as well as Jacques Derrida and Jean-François Lyotard who are frequently referred to in the context of the book. These pages should be kept clean of reference to the issue and the reasoning presented on the discussion page, as necessary.
There is currently no reference to the topic.
There is currently no reference to the topic.
There is currently no reference to the topic but there is mention on the discussion page.
There is currently no reference to the topic.
Contains:
- "Irigaray was criticised by Alan Sokal in Intellectual Impostures for arguing that E=mc2 is a "sexed equation" (because it privileges the speed of light) and arguing that fluid mechanics has been neglected by "masculine" science because it prefers to deal with "masculine" rigid objects rather than "feminine" fluids."
(Intellectual Impostures is the English title outside of the U.S.)
Which is duplicated from the article on the book and is one of the most egregious misrepresentations of the excerpted works.
There is currently no reference to the topic but there is mention on the discussion page.
Contains a brief reference in the "Criticism" section
Contains:
- "Latour's 1987 book Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society is one of the key texts of the sociology of scientific knowledge, and as such has become the lightning rod of much of the criticism directed against him, such as the book Fashionable Nonsense by Sokal and Bricmont; their critics were most particularly directed against the concept of Strong Programme"
There is currently no reference to the topic but there is mention on the discussion page.
There is currently no reference to the topic but there is mention on the discussion page.
[edit] Related Articles
By length of treatment, Sokal and the book are the most important figure and text in Postmodernism. Since this is hardly the case, we should reduce the 276 word paragraph to a sentence or two and find a fitting context for said sentence.
There is currently no reference to the topic.
There is currently no reference to the topic.
The "Unitelligibility" subsection of the "Criticisms of deconstruction" section contains:
- "The question of whether deconstruction really "means something" was explored by an experiment conducted by Alan Sokal, a liberal-modernist physicist who published an article in a leading (though not peer-reviewed) journal using some of the language, vocabulary, and rhetorical devices of deconstruction, but which he deliberately designed to be what he considered "self-indulgent nonsense". See Sokal affair. This parody was not truly nonsensical, however, as it had its own internal logic."
It is debateable whether this paragraph should stay in the article. It is clear that. It needs significant, copy editing. It is clear that the situation of the topic in relation to deconstruction needs to be revised.
[edit] Articles on the topic
Alan Sokal
Jean Bricmont
Sokal Affair
Fashionable Nonsense
While these pages are a source of misinformation, they only relate to themselves. In addition, they are possibly 'strongholds' of this misinformed viewpoint. It is likely that 'official' intervention would be needed to permanently make these articles accurate.
However, the number of articles that link to these articles creates an inflated connotation of importance that is possibly undesirable.
[edit] Other Articles
(This article is currently NPOV disputed for reasons unrelated to the topic.)
Contains a reference to the topic, consisting of only internal links in the "External links" section...
In this list, the topic is listed in the "Science/Medicine" category which should likely be moved to "Popular culture/Entertainment and Media" or "Popular culture/Politics and ideology."
The topic is mentioned in the context of peer review which is not applicable since Social Text does not practice peer review; nor is it common practice for any literary journal.
Linked as "Other" under "See Also." Seems inaccurate but relatively unimportant.
Linked as a related article as a "Notable troll example"
A "real-life" "internet troll." The mind reels.
The topic is mentioned in the context of peer review which is not applicable since Social Text does not practice peer review; nor is it common practice for any literary journal.
Consists almost primarily of references to the topic.
Consists almost primarily of references to the topic.
Gives the topic rather inflated importance.
Sociology of scientific knowledge
Apparently believes that the topic is the only reason that anyone has a problem with SSK.
Linked as an example
- "An academic scandal is one that exposes the unethical or erroneous work of a major academic figure."
Who is the "major academic figure" in this case?
One of three links in "See Also" What is the relevance?
Has an overlong and horribly written paragraph related to the topic.
[edit] Articles whose usage seems appropriate
However, internal links can be seen as a measure of importance. It should be debated which are worthwhile and which aren't.
Affair
Hoax
False document
New York University
Social constructionism
Scientific misconduct
Nihilartikel
Piotr Zak
Bogdanov Affair
[edit] Automated lists
What links to Sokal Affair?
What links to Fashionable Nonsense?
