Sokal affair

Last updated

The Sokal affair, also called the Sokal hoax, [1] was a demonstrative scholarly hoax performed by Alan Sokal, a physics professor at New York University and University College London. In 1996, Sokal submitted an article to Social Text , an academic journal of cultural studies. The submission was an experiment to test the journal's intellectual rigor, specifically to investigate whether "a leading North American journal of cultural studies—whose editorial collective includes such luminaries as Fredric Jameson and Andrew Ross—[would] publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions." [2]

Contents

The article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", [3] was published in the journal's spring/summer 1996 "Science Wars" issue. It proposed that quantum gravity is a social and linguistic construct. The journal did not practice academic peer review and it did not submit the article for outside expert review by a physicist. [3] [4] Three weeks after its publication in May 1996, Sokal revealed in the magazine Lingua Franca that the article was a hoax. [2]

The hoax caused controversy about the scholarly merit of commentary on the physical sciences by those in the humanities; the influence of postmodern philosophy on social disciplines in general; and academic ethics, including whether Sokal was wrong to deceive the editors or readers of Social Text; and whether Social Text had abided by proper scientific ethics.

In 2008, Sokal published Beyond the Hoax , which revisited the history of the hoax and discussed its lasting implications.

Background

Sokal in 2011 Alan Sokal.jpg
Sokal in 2011

In an interview on the U.S. radio program All Things Considered , Sokal said he was inspired to submit the bogus article after reading Higher Superstition (1994), in which authors Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt claim that some humanities journals will publish anything as long as it has "the proper leftist thought" and quoted (or was written by) well-known leftist thinkers. [5] [lower-alpha 1]

Gross and Levitt had been defenders of the philosophy of scientific realism, opposing postmodernist academics who questioned scientific objectivity. They asserted that anti-intellectual sentiment in liberal arts departments (especially English departments) caused the increase of deconstructionist thought, which eventually resulted in a deconstructionist critique of science. They saw the critique as a "repertoire of rationalizations" for avoiding the study of science. [6]

Article

Sokal reasoned that if the presumption of editorial laziness was correct, the nonsensical content of his article would be irrelevant to whether the editors would publish it. What would matter would be ideological obsequiousness, fawning references to deconstructionist writers, and sufficient quantities of the appropriate jargon. After the article was published and the hoax revealed, he wrote:

The results of my little experiment demonstrate, at the very least, that some fashionable sectors of the American academic Left have been getting intellectually lazy. The editors of Social Text liked my article because they liked its conclusion: that "the content and methodology of postmodern science provide powerful intellectual support for the progressive political project" [sec. 6]. They apparently felt no need to analyze the quality of the evidence, the cogency of the arguments, or even the relevance of the arguments to the purported conclusion. [7]

Content of the article

"Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity" [3] proposed that quantum gravity has progressive political implications, and that the "morphogenetic field" could be a valid theory of quantum gravity. (A morphogenetic field is a concept adapted by Rupert Sheldrake in a way that Sokal characterized in the affair's aftermath as "a bizarre New Age idea.") [2] Sokal wrote that the concept of "an external world whose properties are independent of any individual human being" was "dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook."

After referring skeptically to the "so-called scientific method", the article declared that "it is becoming increasingly apparent that physical 'reality'" is fundamentally "a social and linguistic construct." It went on to state that because scientific research is "inherently theory-laden and self-referential", it "cannot assert a privileged epistemological status with respect to counterhegemonic narratives emanating from dissident or marginalized communities", and that therefore a "liberatory science" and an "emancipatory mathematics", spurning "the elite caste canon of 'high science'", needed to be established for a "postmodern science [that] provide[s] powerful intellectual support for the progressive political project."

Moreover, the article's footnotes conflate academic terms with sociopolitical rhetoric, e.g.:

Just as liberal feminists are frequently content with a minimal agenda of legal and social equality for women and "pro-choice", so liberal (and even some socialist) mathematicians are often content to work within the hegemonic Zermelo–Fraenkel framework (which, reflecting its nineteenth-century liberal origins, already incorporates the axiom of equality) supplemented only by the axiom of choice.

Publication

Sokal submitted the article to Social Text, whose editors were collecting articles for the "Science Wars" issue. "Transgressing the Boundaries" was notable as an article by a natural scientist; biologist Ruth Hubbard also had an article in the issue. [8] Later, after Sokal revealed the hoax in Lingua Franca, Social Text's editors wrote that they had requested editorial changes that Sokal refused to make, [4] and had had concerns about the quality of the writing: "We requested him (a) to excise a good deal of the philosophical speculation and (b) to excise most of his footnotes." [9] Still, despite calling Sokal a "difficult, uncooperative author", and noting that such writers were "well known to journal editors", based on Sokal's credentials Social Text published the article in the May 1996 Spring/Summer "Science Wars" issue. [4] The editors did not seek peer review of the article by physicists or otherwise; they later defended this decision on the basis that Social Text was a journal of open intellectual inquiry and the article was not offered as a contribution to physics. [4]

Responses

Follow-up between Sokal and the editors

In the May 1996 issue of Lingua Franca, in the article "A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies", Sokal revealed that "Transgressing the Boundaries" was a hoax and concluded that Social Text "felt comfortable publishing an article on quantum physics without bothering to consult anyone knowledgeable in the subject" because of its ideological proclivities and editorial bias. [2]

In their defense, Social Text's editors said they believed that Sokal's essay "was the earnest attempt of a professional scientist to seek some kind of affirmation from postmodern philosophy for developments in his field" and that "its status as parody does not alter, substantially, our interest in the piece, itself, as a symptomatic document." [10] Besides criticizing his writing style, Social Text's editors accused Sokal of behaving unethically in deceiving them. [11]

Sokal said the editors' response demonstrated the problem that he sought to identify. Social Text, as an academic journal, published the article not because it was faithful, true, and accurate to its subject, but because an "academic authority" had written it and because of the appearance of the obscure writing. The editors said they considered it poorly written but published it because they felt Sokal was an academic seeking their intellectual affirmation. Sokal remarked:

My goal isn't to defend science from the barbarian hordes of lit crit (we'll survive just fine, thank you), but to defend the Left from a trendy segment of itself. ... There are hundreds of important political and economic issues surrounding science and technology. Sociology of science, at its best, has done much to clarify these issues. But sloppy sociology, like sloppy science, is useless, or even counterproductive. [4]

Social Text's response revealed that none of the editors had suspected Sokal's piece was a parody. Instead, they speculated Sokal's admission "represented a change of heart, or a folding of his intellectual resolve." Sokal found further humor in the idea that the article's absurdity was hard to spot:

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 theories of 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. [12]

Book by Sokal and Bricmont

In 1997, Sokal and Jean Bricmont co-wrote Impostures intellectuelles (US: Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science; UK: Intellectual Impostures, 1998). [13] The book featured analysis of extracts from established intellectuals' writings that Sokal and Bricmont claimed misused scientific terminology. [14] It closed with a critical summary of postmodernism and criticism of the strong programme of social constructionism in the sociology of scientific knowledge. [15]

In 2008, Sokal published a followup book, Beyond the Hoax , which revisited the history of the hoax and discussed its lasting implications. [16]

Jacques Derrida

The French philosopher Jacques Derrida, whose 1966 statement about Einstein's theory of relativity was quoted in Sokal's paper, was singled out for criticism, particularly in U.S. newspaper coverage of the hoax. [17] [18] One weekly magazine used two images of him, a photo and a caricature, to illustrate a "dossier" on Sokal's paper. [18] Arkady Plotnitsky commented: [17]

Even given Derrida's status as an icon of intellectual controversy on the Anglo-American cultural scene, it is remarkable that out of thousands of pages of Derrida's published works, a single extemporaneous remark on relativity made in 1966 (before Derrida was "the Derrida" and, in a certain sense, even before "deconstruction") ... is made to stand for nearly all of deconstructive or even postmodernist (not a term easily, if at all, applicable to Derrida) treatments of science.

Derrida later responded to the hoax in "Sokal et Bricmont ne sont pas sérieux" ("Sokal and Bricmont Aren't Serious"), first published on 20 November 1997 in Le Monde . He called Sokal's action "sad" for having trivialized Sokal's mathematical work and "ruining the chance to carefully examine controversies" about scientific objectivity. [18] Derrida then faulted him and Bricmont for what he considered "an act of intellectual bad faith" in their follow-up book, Impostures intellectuelles : they had published two articles almost simultaneously, one in English in The Times Literary Supplement on 17 October 1997 [19] and one in French in Libération on 18–19 October 1997, [20] but while the two articles were almost identical, they differed in how they treated Derrida.

The English-language article had a list of French intellectuals who were not included in Sokal's and Bricmont's book: "Such well-known thinkers as Althusser, Barthes, and Foucault—who, as readers of the TLS will be well aware, have always had their supporters and detractors on both sides of the Channel—appear in our book only in a minor role, as cheerleaders for the texts we criticize." The French-language list, however, included Derrida: "Des penseurs célèbres tels qu'Althusser, Barthes, Derrida et Foucault sont essentiellement absents de notre livre" ("Famous thinkers such as Althusser, Barthes, Derrida and Foucault are essentially absent from our book").

According to Brian Reilly, Derrida may also have been sensitive to another difference between the French and English versions of Impostures intellectuelles. In the French, his citation from the original hoax article is said to be an "isolated" instance of abuse, [21] whereas the English text adds a parenthetical remark that Derrida's work contained "no systematic misuse (or indeed attention to) science." [22] [23] Sokal and Bricmont insisted that the difference between the articles was "banal." [24] Nevertheless, Derrida concluded that Sokal was not serious in his method, but had used the spectacle of a "quick practical joke" to displace the scholarship Derrida believed the public deserved. [25]

Criticism of social sciences

Sociologist Stephen Hilgartner, chairman of Cornell University's science and technology studies department, wrote "The Sokal Affair in Context" (1997), [26] comparing Sokal's hoax to "Confirmational Response: Bias Among Social Work Journals" (1990), an article by William M. Epstein published in Science, Technology, & Human Values . [27] Epstein used a similar method to Sokal's, submitting fictitious articles to real academic journals to measure their response. Though much more systematic than Sokal's work, it received scant media attention. Hilgartner argued that the "asymmetric" effect of the successful Sokal hoax compared with Epstein's experiment cannot be attributed to its quality, but that "[t]hrough a mechanism that resembles confirmatory bias, audiences may apply less stringent standards of evidence and ethics to attacks on targets that they are predisposed to regard unfavorably." [26] As a result, according to Hilgartner, though competent in terms of method, Epstein's experiment was largely muted by the more socially accepted social work discipline he critiqued, while Sokal's attack on cultural studies, despite lacking experimental rigor, was accepted. Hilgartner also argued that Sokal's hoax reinforced the views of well-known pundits such as George Will and Rush Limbaugh, so that his opinions were amplified by media outlets predisposed to agree with his argument. [28]

The Sokal Affair extended from academia to the public press. Anthropologist Bruno Latour, who was criticized in Fashionable Nonsense, described the scandal as a "tempest in a teacup." Retired Northeastern University mathematician-turned social scientist Gabriel Stolzenberg wrote essays criticizing the statements of Sokal and his allies, [29] arguing that they insufficiently grasped the philosophy they criticized, rendering their criticism meaningless. In Social Studies of Science , Bricmont and Sokal responded to Stolzenberg, [30] denouncing his representations of their work and criticizing his commentary about the "strong programme" of the sociology of science. Stolzenberg replied in the same issue that their critique and allegations of misrepresentation were based on misreadings. He advised readers to slowly and skeptically examine the arguments of each party, bearing in mind that "the obvious is sometimes the enemy of the true." [31]

Influence

Sociological follow-up study

In 2009, Cornell sociologist Robb Willer performed an experiment in which undergraduate students read Sokal's paper and were told either that it was written by another student or that it was by a famous academic. He found that students who believed the paper's author was a high-status intellectual rated it better in quality and intelligibility. [32]

Sokal III

In October 2021, the scholarly journal Higher Education Quarterly published a bogus article "authored" by "Sage Owens" and "Kal Avers-Lynde III". The initials stand for "Sokal III". [33] The Quarterly retracted the article. [34]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Postmodernism</span> Artistic, cultural, and theoretical movement

Postmodernism is an intellectual stance or mode of discourse characterized by skepticism towards elements of the Enlightenment worldview. It questions the "grand narratives" of modernity, rejects the certainty of knowledge and stable meaning, and acknowledges the influence of ideology in maintaining political power. Objective claims are dismissed as naïve realism, emphasizing the conditional nature of knowledge. Postmodernism embraces self-referentiality, epistemological relativism, moral relativism, pluralism, irony, irreverence, and eclecticism. It opposes the "universal validity" of binary oppositions, stable identity, hierarchy, and categorization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social constructionism</span> Sociological theory regarding shared understandings

Social constructionism is a term used in sociology, social ontology, and communication theory. The term can serve somewhat different functions in each field; however, the foundation of this theoretical framework suggests various facets of social reality—such as concepts, beliefs, norms, and values—are formed through continuous interactions and negotiations among society's members, rather than empirical observation of physical reality. The theory of social constructionism posits that much of what individuals perceive as 'reality' is actually the outcome of a dynamic process of construction influenced by social conventions and structures.

<i>Lingua Franca</i> (magazine) American magazine

Lingua Franca was an American magazine about intellectual and literary life in academia.

<i>Higher Superstition</i> 1994 book by Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt

Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science is a 1994 book about the philosophy of science by the biologist Paul R. Gross and the mathematician Norman Levitt.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alan Sokal</span> American physicist and mathematician (born 1955)

Alan David Sokal is an American professor of mathematics at University College London and professor emeritus of physics at New York University. He works in statistical mechanics and combinatorics. He is a critic of postmodernism, and caused the Sokal affair in 1996 when his deliberately nonsensical paper was published by Duke University Press's Social Text. He also co-authored a paper criticizing the critical positivity ratio concept in positive psychology.

<i>Fashionable Nonsense</i> 1997 book by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont

Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science, first published in French in 1997 as Impostures intellectuelles, is a book by physicists Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. As part of the so-called science wars, Sokal and Bricmont criticize postmodernism in academia for the misuse of scientific and mathematical concepts in postmodern writing.

Paul Virilio was a French cultural theorist, urbanist, architect and aesthetic philosopher. He is best known for his writings about technology as it has developed in relation to speed and power, with diverse references to architecture, the arts, the city and the military. Virilio was a prolific creator of neologisms, most notably his concept of "Dromology", the all-around, pervasive inscription of speed in every aspect of life.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bogdanov affair</span> 2002 French academic dispute

The Bogdanov affair was an academic dispute regarding the legitimacy of a series of theoretical physics papers written by French twins Igor and Grichka Bogdanov. The papers were published in reputable scientific journals, and were alleged by their authors to culminate in a theory for describing what occurred before and at the Big Bang.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Obscurantism</span> Practice of obscuring information

In the fields of philosophy, the terms obscurantism and obscurationism identify and describe the anti-intellectual practices of deliberately presenting information in an abstruse and imprecise manner that limits further inquiry and understanding of a subject. The two historical and intellectual denotations of obscurantism are: (1) the deliberate restriction of knowledge — opposition to the dissemination of knowledge; and (2) deliberate obscurity — a recondite style of writing characterized by deliberate vagueness.

<i>Social Text</i> Academic journal

Social Text is an academic journal published by Duke University Press. Since its inception by an independent editorial collective in 1979, Social Text has addressed a wide range of social and cultural phenomena, covering questions of gender, sexuality, race, and the environment. Each issue covers subjects in the debates around feminism, Marxism, neoliberalism, postcolonialism, postmodernism, queer theory, and popular culture. The journal has since been run by different collectives over the years, mostly based at New York City universities. It has maintained an avowedly progressive political orientation and scholarship over these years, if also a less Marxist one. Since 1992, it is published by Duke University Press.

The science wars were a series of scholarly and public discussions in the 1990s over the social place of science in making authoritative claims about the world. Encyclopedia.com, citing the Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, describes the science wars as the

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andrew Ross (sociologist)</span> Scottish sociologist

Andrew Ross, a Scottish-born social activist and analyst, is Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis at New York University (NYU). He has authored and edited numerous books, and written for The New York Times, The Guardian, The Nation, Newsweek, and Al Jazeera. Much of his writing focuses on labor, the urban environment, and the organisation of work, from the Western world of business and high-technology to conditions of offshore labour in the Global South. Making use of social theory as well as ethnography, his writing questions the human and environmental cost of economic growth.

Objectivity in science is an attempt to uncover truths about the natural world by eliminating personal biases, emotions, and false beliefs. It is often linked to observation as part of the scientific method. It is thus intimately related to the aim of testability and reproducibility. To be considered objective, the results of measurement must be communicated from person to person, and then demonstrated for third parties, as an advance in a collective understanding of the world. Such demonstrable knowledge has ordinarily conferred demonstrable powers of prediction or technology.

Criticism of postmodernism is intellectually diverse, reflecting various critical attitudes toward postmodernity, postmodern philosophy, postmodern art, and postmodern architecture. Postmodernism is generally defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony, or rejection toward what it describes as the grand narratives and ideologies associated with modernism, especially those associated with Enlightenment rationality though postmodernism in the arts may have their own definitions. Thus, while common targets of postmodern criticism include universalist ideas of objective reality, morality, truth, human nature, reason, science, language, and social progress, critics of postmodernism often defend such concepts. It is frequently alleged that postmodern scholars promote obscurantism, are hostile to objective truth, and encourage relativism to an extent that is epistemically and ethically crippling. Criticism of more artistic postmodern movements such as postmodern art or literature may include objections to a departure from beauty, lack of coherence or comprehensibility, deviating from clear structure and the consistent use of dark and negative themes.

<i>What Is Philosophy?</i> (Deleuze and Guattari book) Book by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari

What is Philosophy? is a 1991 book by the philosopher Gilles Deleuze and the psychoanalyst Félix Guattari. The two had met shortly after May 1968 when they were in their forties and collaborated most notably on Capitalism & Schizophrenia and Kafka: Towards a Minority Literature (1975). In this, the last book they co-signed, philosophy, science, and art are treated as three modes of thought.

Cultural studies is a politically engaged postdisciplinary academic field that explores the dynamics of especially contemporary culture and its social and historical foundations. Cultural studies researchers generally investigate how cultural practices relate to wider systems of power associated with, or operating through, social phenomena. These include ideology, class structures, national formations, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, and generation. Employing cultural analysis, cultural studies views cultures not as fixed, bounded, stable, and discrete entities, but rather as constantly interacting and changing sets of practices and processes. The field of cultural studies encompasses a range of theoretical and methodological perspectives and practices. Although distinct from the discipline of cultural anthropology and the interdisciplinary field of ethnic studies, cultural studies draws upon and has contributed to each of these fields.

1996 in philosophy

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Grievance studies affair</span> Group of bogus academic papers (2018)

The grievance studies affair was the project of a team of three authors—Peter Boghossian, James A. Lindsay, and Helen Pluckrose—to highlight what they saw as poor scholarship and erosion of standards in several academic fields. Taking place over 2017 and 2018, their project entailed submitting bogus papers to academic journals on topics from the field of critical social theory such as cultural, queer, race, gender, fat, and sexuality studies to determine whether they would pass through peer review and be accepted for publication. Several of these papers were subsequently published, which the authors cited in support of their contention.

Gabriel Stolzenberg was an American mathematician who taught at various academic institutions.

References

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Sokal got the idea for his "experiment" after reading Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt's Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels With Science (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994). Gross and Levitt argued that the success of getting published in postmodern journals was based not on the quality of the work but rather on its "academic leanings—papers displaying the proper leftist thought, especially if written by or quoting well known authors, were being published in spite of their low quality (Demers 2011, p. 15).

Citations

  1. ↑ "The Sokal Hoax: A Forum", Lingua Franca , July 1996
  2. 1 2 3 4 Sokal, Alan D. (June 5, 1996), "A Physicist Experiments with Cultural Studies", Lingua Franca , archived from the original on October 5, 2007
  3. 1 2 3 Sokal, Alan D. (November 28, 1994). "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity". Social Text (46/47). Duke University Press (published 1996): 217–252. doi:10.2307/466856. JSTOR   466856. Archived from the original on May 19, 2017. Retrieved March 15, 2008.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Bruce Robbins; Andrew Ross (July 1996). "Mystery science theater". Lingua Franca . Archived from the original on May 29, 2017. Retrieved May 3, 2009. Reply by Alan Sokal.
  5. ↑ Sokal, Alan (May 15, 1996). "Parody". All Things Considered (Interview). Interviewed by Robert Siegel. National Public Radio. Archived from the original on July 12, 2018. Retrieved April 5, 2018.
  6. ↑ Gross & Levitt (1994 , p. 6)
  7. ↑ Sokal, Alan. "Revelation: A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies". In Editors of Lingua Franca (2000) , pp. 49–54.
  8. ↑ Hubbard, Ruth. 1996. "Gender and Genitals: Constructs of Sex and Gender." Social Text 46/47:157–165. doi : 10.2307/466851. JSTOR   466851.
  9. ↑ "Lingua Franca". Archived from the original on May 29, 2017. Retrieved September 15, 2014.
  10. ↑ Andrew Ross, "A discussion of Jacques Derrida and Deconstruction", May 24, 1996
  11. ↑ Robbins, Bruce; Ross, Andrew (1996). "Editorial response to Sokal hoax by editors of Social Text" (PDF). Physics.nyu.edu. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 9, 2012. Retrieved March 11, 2012.
  12. ↑ Gross (2010, p. 307)
  13. ↑ Sokal & Bricmont (1998a , p. xii)
  14. ↑ Sokal, Alan (May 1996). "A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies". Lingua Franca . Archived from the original on September 4, 2019. Retrieved March 5, 2008.
  15. ↑ Epstein, Barbara (Winter 1997). "Postmodernism and the Left". New Politics . Archived from the original on May 12, 2008. Retrieved March 5, 2008.
  16. ↑ "The Book of the Week: Beyond the Hoax: Science, Philosophy and Culture" . Times Higher Education. March 13, 2008. Retrieved June 4, 2020.
  17. 1 2 Plotnitsky, Arkady (January 1997). "'But It Is Above All Not True': Derrida, Relativity, and the 'Science Wars'". Postmodern Culture. 7 (2). doi:10.1353/pmc.1997.0006. S2CID   144322398. ProQuest   1426652600.
  18. 1 2 3 Derrida (1997)
  19. ↑ Sokal, Allan and Jean Bricmont. "The Furor Over Impostures intellectuelles: What Is All the Fuss About?" The Times Literary Supplement 17 October 1997, p. 17.
  20. ↑ Sokal, Allan and Jean Bricmont. "Que se passe-t-il ?" Libération 18–19 October 1997. pp. 5–6.
  21. ↑ Sokal & Bricmont (1997 , p. 17)
  22. ↑ Sokal & Bricmont (1998b , p. 8)
  23. ↑ Reilly, Brian J. (2006). Hopkins Impromptu: Following Jacques Derrida Through Theory's Empire. MLN, 121(4), pp. 919–924.
  24. ↑ Sokal, Allan and Jean Bricmont. "Réponse à Jacques Derrida et Max Dorra." Le Monde , 12 December 1997. p. 23.
  25. ↑ Derrida (2005 , p. 70)
  26. 1 2 Hilgartner, Stephen (Autumn 1997), "The Sokal Affair in Context", Science, Technology, & Human Values , 22 (4): 506–522, doi:10.1177/016224399702200404, S2CID   145740247
  27. ↑ Epstein, William M. (1990), "Confirmational response bias among social work journals", Science, Technology, & Human Values , 15 (1): 9–38, doi:10.1177/016224399001500102, S2CID   140863997
  28. ↑ Hilgartner, Stephen (Autumn 1997), "The Sokal Affair in Context", Science, Technology, & Human Values , 22 (4): 506–522, doi:10.1177/016224399702200404, S2CID   145740247
  29. ↑ Stolzenberg, Gabriel. "Debunk: Expose as a Sham or False". Math.bu.edu. Archived from the original on November 30, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2005.
  30. ↑ "Reply to Gabriel Stolzenberg" (PDF). Social Studies of Science. Physics.nyu.edu. Archived (PDF) from the original on May 30, 2008. Retrieved April 4, 2008.
  31. ↑ Stolzenberg, Gabriel. "Reply to Bricmont and Sokal" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on May 9, 2008. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
  32. ↑ Willer, Robb; Kuwabara, Ko; Macy, Michael (September 2009). "The False Enforcement of Unpopular Norms" (PDF). American Journal of Sociology. 115 (2): 451–490. doi:10.1086/599250. PMID   20614762. S2CID   16767512. Archived (PDF) from the original on April 2, 2015. Retrieved February 21, 2015.
  33. ↑ Eric Kelderman (November 30, 2021). "Another 'Sokal' Hoax? The Latest Imitation Calls an Academic Journal's Integrity Into Question". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December 6, 2021. The authors are listed as "Sage Owens" and "Kal Avers-Lynde III"—initials that spell out SOKAL III. It didn't take long for online sleuths to out it as a hoax. The Higher Ed Quarterly paper appears to be the latest imitation of Sokal's infamous 1996 prank
  34. ↑ "Retracted : Donor money and the academy: Perceptions of undue donor pressure in political science, economics, and philosophy". Higher Education Quarterly. 76 (2): 486–509. 2021. doi:10.1111/hequ.12360. S2CID   240018317.

Bibliography

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.