Subject: Re: PKF: RE: Re: A reintroduction
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:52:24 -0200


I haven't read Sokal's criticism on PM, I have though heard that he
sometimes makes the same mistake he is acusing PMists to do, e.g. detach one
theory from one field to use it to convince people on other. Of course, his
mistake would then be that he ignores the specific field of use of these and
that perhaps they don't have the same function as he supposes and tries to
invalidate all PM. Now, I do think there's a lot of bullshit on PM,
specially if we are talking about Guattari, but I would say PF is by far the
one that attracts me the most. I have had my loveaffair with Foucault
(intelectually speaking) but now I haven't read him for sometime. Please
tell me, is PF also criticised by Sokal?
Now, about the question on sentences being or not meaningless. Isn't true
that one concept to become such a thing should be agreed by the speaker and
the hearer and that, therefore, a whole system of concepts (if not to say
that a concept can only have meaning since it is part of a system) is
nothing but a collective construction? If so, would Sokal's statement have
whatsoever meaning?

Glad to see the list working,

 FRed


---------------------------------------------------
"... sabemos muitas mentiras dizer símeis aos fatos..." (Hesíodo, Teogonia)
Frederico Gorski
Praça Vendôme, http://www.vendome.art.br
Florianópolis, SC - Brasil

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Geelan" <dgeelan-AT-Ualberta.ca>
To: <feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: PKF: RE: Re: A reintroduction


> My personal take on the whole Sokal affair is that he ridiculed that
> which he fundamentally did not understand, and that he was rewarded for
> that by others who shared his incomprehension. I could talk about Eco's
> distinction between the intentions of the author, the work and the
> reader: even if Sokal wrote the text, that doesn't give him the final
> word on its meaning (a) in itself and (b) for a particular reader. But I
> fear this is a polarised debate that can end up being as damaging to
> discourse as creationism/evolutionism! Suffice it to say that I wish
> Paul Feyerabend had been around during the Sokal affair.
>
> D
>
> meathorne-gould wrote:
>
> >Okay 10 points go to James for the first correct response. Sorry ravi you
> >were number 2. I appreciate your replies I don't remember corresponding
with
> >Ravi during that time but it was a while ago.
> >
> >The next 10 points are still up for grabs (I might even throw in a
chocolate
> >fish)
> >
> >Thanks for thinking about it James, I have a couple of comments on your
> >preliminary thoughts that might (or might not) help.
> >
> >Yes you are correct when you say "...there are no sentences that have no
> >meaning whatsoever" but I suspect that Sokal might say that stating this
is
> >just obfuscation, a bit like if I say "When it is raining it rains." Yes
the
> >sentence has meaning to someone who hears it, in fact if I said it they
> >would probably look at me a little strangely which creates a whole other
> >layer of meaning. I will take a liberty with Sokal though and venture to
say
> >that he might think that the sentence had no value and was in itself void
of
> >meaning. So one thing I think he is saying is that there are a few? some?
> >many? in the field who write in this way simply because it sounds clever
but
> >in actual fact is empty.
> >
> >What my second question was really saying then is -- Does relativism,
> >post-modernism, nihilism and what ever other "ism" is in fashion at the
> >moment (I don't know I've had nothing to do with the field for 6 + years)
> >encourage this sort of meaningless statement and are those authors that
> >write in this way rewarded within the field for their efforts when in
fact
> >what they write contributes nothing of value to anything except perhaps
> >their bank accounts?
> >
> >
> >Cheers
> >Mike Eathorne-Gould
> >meathorne-gould-AT-business.otago.ac.nz
> >
> >**********************************************************************
> >Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> >Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> >Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> -- 
> David R. Geelan, PhD
> Department of Secondary Education
> 341 Education South, University of Alberta
> Edmonton AB, Canada T6G 2G5
> Ph. (780) 492-5671, Fax (780) 492-9402
> dgeelan-AT-ualberta.ca, http://bravus.port5.com
>
> I can't find the printer manual. Do you think
> the rice cooker's similar enough?
> I found the manual for that. - someone in chat
>
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 29/10/2004 / Versão: 1.5.2
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
>
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
>
http://www.terra.com.br/centralunificada/emailprotegido/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=tchefred&_l=1099052814.422954.20454.larissa.terra.com.br
>
>


**********************************************************************
Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu