rvitinn

Alan Sokal og pstmdernismi

Sumari 1996 birti tmariti Social Text grein sem heitir Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity eftir elisfringinn Alan Sokal. Ritstjrn Social Text var vafalti uppveru af v a f grein eftir raunvsindamann og hafa v hugsanlega ekki lesi hana mjg tarlega. Og , vandamli er a a skiptir engu mli hversu tarlega mis texti er lesinn, ekki er nokkur lei a f nokku af viti r honum. Grein Sokal er bull fr upphafi til enda.

There are many natural scientists, and especially physicists, who continue to reject the notion that the disciplines concerned with social and cultural criticism can have anything to contribute, except perhaps peripherally, to their research. Still less are they receptive to the idea that the very foundations of their worldview must be revised or rebuilt in the light of such criticism. Rather, they cling to the dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook, which can be summarized briefly as follows: that there exists an external world, whose properties are independent of any individual human being and indeed of humanity as a whole; that these properties are encoded in ``eternal'' physical laws; and that human beings can obtain reliable, albeit imperfect and tentative, knowledge of these laws by hewing to the ``objective'' procedures and epistemological strictures prescribed by the (so-called) scientific method.

Sokal fletti svo ofan af llu saman grein sem heitir A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies Sar gaf hann samstarfi vi Jean Bricmont t bkina Intellectual Impostures ar sem eir fjalla um misnotkun vsinda og ekkingarfrilega afstishyggju. g hef ekki lesi bkina, arf a koma yfir hana hndum.

So, to test the prevailing intellectual standards, I decided to try a modest (though admittedly uncontrolled) experiment: Would a leading North American journal of cultural studies -- whose editorial collective includes such luminaries as Fredric Jameson and Andrew Ross -- publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions?

...

In the second paragraph I declare, without the slightest evidence or argument, that ``physical `reality' [note the scare quotes] ... is at bottom a social and linguistic construct.'' Not our theoriesof physical reality, mind you, but the reality itself. Fair enough: anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.)

...

The fundamental silliness of my article lies, however, not in its numerous solecisms but in the dubiousness of its central thesis and of the ``reasoning'' adduced to support it. Basically, I claim that quantum gravity -- the still-speculative theory of space and time on scales of a millionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a centimeter -- has profound politicalimplications (which, of course, are ``progressive''). In support of this improbable proposition, I proceed as follows: First, I quote some controversial philosophical pronouncements of Heisenberg and Bohr, and assert (without argument) that quantum physics is profoundly consonant with ``postmodernist epistemology.'' Next, I assemble a pastiche -- Derrida and general relativity, Lacan and topology, Irigaray and quantum gravity -- held together by vague rhetoric about ``nonlinearity'', ``flux'' and ``interconnectedness.'' Finally, I jump (again without argument) to the assertion that ``postmodern science'' has abolished the concept of objective reality. Nowhere in all of this is there anything resembling a logical sequence of thought; one finds only citations of authority, plays on words, strained analogies, and bald assertions.

g hvet ykkur til a lesa allavega sari greinina, s fyrri er neitanlega ansi miki torf. Hn er ht mia vi margt bulli sem kemur fr msum pstmdernistum og rum andstingum vestrnnar skynsemishyggju. etta vital vi Sokal er lka gt lesning.

Hr landi sr maur stundum svona texta, feministar vitna t.d. gjarnan kollega sna sem afneita vsindum eim forsendum a au su bygg reynsluheimi karla en ekki kvenna og svo framvegis. Undanfari hef g s Gufringa dsama texta sem eir svo sar jta a eir viti ekki hva i. annig virist innihaldi vera aukaatrii - stllinn, tliti aalatrii.
Kristjn Kristjnsson skrifai fyrir nokkrum rum greinarflokk sem birtist Mogganum og ht tarandi aldarlok. Greinarnar eru einnig bk hans Mannkostir. ar fer hann yfir helstu gagnrni pstmdernismann og siferilega afstishyggju. Mli einnig me eirri grein.

egar maur les texta sem mgulegt er a f nokkurt vit eru miklar lkur v a ekkert vit s textanum. Vissulega geta menn veri misgir pennar, sumir eiga auvelt me a koma hugmyndum fr sr en arir ekki. En egar mgulegt er a hndla hugmyndina, rkin virast skiljanleg eru lkurnar nokkrar a a sem maur hefur hndunum s bara bull. Hinn mguleikinn, a maur s bara svona vitlaus er lka til stunni en g tiloka hann alltaf fyrirfram, finnst a svo trleg hugmynd :-)

efahyggja
Athugasemdir

Mr rlygsson - 30/12/03 18:58 #

segir: "egar maur les texta sem mgulegt er a f nokkurt vit eru miklar lkur v a ekkert vit s textanum."

M..o. ef lest eitthva sem skilur ekki er a lklega bara vitleysa. liggur beint vi a spurja hvort viljir meina a a skipti engu mli hvort skilur skilur tungumli sem textinn er skrifaur , hugmyndakerfi/frin sem hann er upprunnin , ea srt ngilega greindur til a metaka inntaki honum?

a er fjarri mr a saka ig um heimsku Matti minn, heldur er g bara a benda hva svona fullyringar eru varasamar.

Varandi ennan brskemmtilega gjrnin Sokals a takast a f bullgrein birta vitru tmariti, vru a alvarleg mistk a taka honum sem einhverjum algildum fellisdmi yfir pstmdernska heimsspeki, ea eins og Sokal segir sjlfur vitalinu sem vsar : "It's important not to exaggerate what the parody shows".

Ennfremur varpar hfundur vitalsins, Julian Baggini, fram mjg mikilvgri spurningu: "He wants to avoid the subtle distinctions and stick to the gross errors. But is it not possible that some of these only appear as gross errors because of a lack of understanding of the subtler ideas underlying them?"

essi spurning gildir enganveginn inntak ess sem Sokal segir, en hjlpar okkur samt a meta hvar takmarkanir hans liggja.

...

Nokkrar spurningar a lokum:

1) Ertu viss um a gerir alltaf ngilegan greinarmun afstishyggju annars vegar og tilhneygingu sumra til a snobba fyrir tilgerarlegu orskri sama hvort a ir eitthva ea ekki?

2) Telur a ll afstishyggja s slm, ea er einhver birtingarmynd hennar sem getur samykkt a s af hinu ga?

3) Getur veri a a a afstishyggja tilokar a a vi flknum spurningum s til eitthva eitt, einfalt og endanlegt svar, hafi eitthva me a a gera a r er svona np vi hana?

g hef lesi hrgul a sem hefur skrifa um etta ml hr dagbkinni inni en tel mig samt ekki vita svari vi ofangreindum spurningum.

Matti . - 30/12/03 23:26 #

liggur beint vi a spurja hvort viljir meina a a skipti engu mli hvort skilur skilur tungumli sem textinn er skrifaur , hugmyndakerfi/frin sem hann er upprunnin , ea srt ngilega greindur til a metaka inntaki honum?

Svari vi fyrri mguleikunum tveim liggur augum upp, g er a sjlfsgu a tala um texta tungumli sem g skil og hugmyndakerfi/fri sem g skil. rija mguleikanum svara g sjlfur lok mlsgreinarinnar me aljlegu tkni [:-)] sem g hefi haldi a kannaist vi. g undanskil v texta sem eru einfaldlega ofar mnum skilning essari upptalningu. a breytir v ekki a miki magn pstmdernskra skrifa er argasta bull og engan htt skiljanlegt.

Svr vi spurningum num: 1) nei, g er ekki viss 2) nei, hugsanlega 3) nei, mr np vi hana vegna ess a hn kemur veg fyrir sammannlegan skilning og eykur raun einangrun lkra jflagshpa, jflokka, kynjanna og svo framvegis. Hn eykur ekki skilning lkum sjnarmium heldur vert mti, hamrar v a s skilningur s ekki til.

Mr rlygsson - 31/12/03 02:12 #

varandi svar itt vi spurningu 3, finnst mr etta hugaverur punktur hj r.

Hins vegar m ekki gleyma v a tt sameiginlegur skilningur geti veri gagnlegur, getur a kosta miklar hrmungar og blsthellingar a koma honum . Afstishyggjan miar m.a. a v a koma veg fyrir arfar blsthellingar og stkka skilning okkar og tvkka tfyrir okkar eigi litla, takmarkaa sjnarhorn.

Hvorutveggja eru gfug sjnarmi - en eins og bendir rttilega hefur afstishyggjan sna vankanta lka.

Mr rlygsson - 31/12/03 02:21 #

...eins og g skil etta, m kannski leika sr a v a segja a afstishyggja hafi ori til sem nokkurs konar mtsvar vi aggressvri heimsvaldastefnu okkar vesturlandaba. Smuleiis opnar hn lei fyrir okkur til a samykkja/hndla aukna fjlbreytni innan okkar eigin samflags eftir "uppreisn" 68-kynslarinnar gegn gamla mnkltrnum.

En auvita er etta grf einfldun ofboslega flknu flagslegu og hugarfarslegu fyrirbri sem teygir anga sna miklu lengra en etta, inn listir, vsindi, plitk og viskipti.