Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
157 bytes added ,  00:44, November 4, 2009
→‎Sokal: incompetent
Line 41: Line 41:     
Sokal did not expose post-modern approaches to science as 'flawed', what he exposed was perhaps the incompetence of a small group of people working for the journal in question. Whilst Sokal was a critic of postmodernism in general, his paper did not expose any fundamental flaw. It should be noted that the journal in question was not actually peer reviewed at the time, so in actual fact even looking at how one might criticise the editors involved, what the publication of the paper actually proved is at best questionable. [[User:DWiggins|DWiggins]] 18:19, 3 November 2009 (EST)
 
Sokal did not expose post-modern approaches to science as 'flawed', what he exposed was perhaps the incompetence of a small group of people working for the journal in question. Whilst Sokal was a critic of postmodernism in general, his paper did not expose any fundamental flaw. It should be noted that the journal in question was not actually peer reviewed at the time, so in actual fact even looking at how one might criticise the editors involved, what the publication of the paper actually proved is at best questionable. [[User:DWiggins|DWiggins]] 18:19, 3 November 2009 (EST)
 +
::most people though Sokal scored a coup. It shwed the leading journal in the field was incompetent. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:44, 3 November 2009 (EST)
17,394

edits

Navigation menu