Postmodernism is destroying our brains, culture and civilization

[CountDeMoney]

At least the Sokal affair was a real hoax that seriously called into question the editorial standards of "postmodern" academic journals.  And it took place in 1996.

Pfft...The Sidd Finch affair beat that by 10 years earlier.

[Maladict]

Carbon Fibre Masculinity

Yes, very masculine.

[celedhring]

I thought we were past the stage of considering everything that's long and hard a phallic symbol? That's the academic equivalent of 12-year old penis jokes.

[Eddie Teach]

So what's the two-legged girl doing in that crowd? 

[Maladict]

So what's the two-legged girl doing in that crowd? 

Not all disabilities are visible? Maybe she has a very poor sense of direction.

[DGuller]

That's the academic equivalent of 12-year old penis jokes.

Is joking about penises of preteens that popular? 

[celedhring]

That's the academic equivalent of 12-year old penis jokes.

Is joking about penises of preteens that popular? 

No, but preteens joking about penises are. The wording is a bit confusing, I admit.

[The Brain]

So what's the two-legged girl doing in that crowd? 

Not all disabilities are visible? Maybe she has a very poor sense of direction.

Cyborgs are disabled now?

[LaCroix]

one real, one cyborg leg seems uncomfortable for running

[Capetan Mihali]

Can't wait for lunch time, when I can crack open Derrida's Archive Fever and do a few pages of pleasure reading.

[Oexmelin]

I agree. Someone should finally determine whether gravity is a social construct or not.

That's the standard, lazy rebuttal, much like "social construct" can be a lazy, cheap form of sociology. That wasn't really Sokal's own cheap point anyway. Who, amongst constructivists, would truly believe that one who step off a cliff would not fall and die? The point is not whether or not gravity is a social construct, for it can very much be shown to be one: e.g., a ton of people can "believe" in gravity without having the slightest idea of the mathematical underpinnings of the theory (thereby giving gravity as a concept a social existence that goes well beyond its scientific definition) or, the manner in which scientists came to formalize the theory in the past and in the present is very much rooted in specific cultural forms (could we not imagine a theory of gravity that used other forms of conceptualizations stemming from other mathematical traditions?), etc.  If you really want to attack "social construction" forms, you want to question either its breadth (i.e., what *isn't* socially constructed? - which makes such statement banal) or the capacity of certain social constructions to resist much longer than others, and in turn provide foundations for other, solid constructions. 

[MadImmortalMan]

Formatting is a social construct.

[frunk]

(could we not imagine a theory of gravity that used other forms of conceptualizations stemming from other mathematical traditions?)

I'm not sure what other mathematical traditions you are thinking of.  The mathematical formulation of General Relativity isn't dependent on a particular language.  There are alternatives to General Relativity, but any that are worth mentioning (apart from historical interest) should match the observed data at least as well as GR.

[grumbler]

(could we not imagine a theory of gravity that used other forms of conceptualizations stemming from other mathematical traditions?)

I'm not sure what other mathematical traditions you are thinking of.  The mathematical formulation of General Relativity isn't dependent on a particular language.  There are alternatives to General Relativity, but any that are worth mentioning (apart from historical interest) should match the observed data at least as well as GR.

We just use a different mathematical grammar... you know, the one where 3+4=5.  Math is just a tradition, after all.

[PDH]

The point of it was that gravity exists as a mathematical/physics proof, one that is used in the sciences - it also exists without the mathematics in the minds of people, and that mental map is very likely quite different from the formal scientific one.  One is the universal symbolic language of numbers, the other is the cultural bound symbols of human language.

I am not sure why the concept of a cultural construct seems so alien to some folks.  The imperfections of human language, the need to communicate in metaphors and understood symbols, and the traditions of group dynamics should impact how the universal facts are filtered through the lens of human existence...