FOM: unexplained provocative statements

[john.kadvany@us.pwcglobal.com]

Martin:  Fair enough, and I apologize for any slight.  I do not mean to be
'insulting', although sometimes polemical and sarcastic. Let me explain
where I stand on Sokal and the associated debate over the so-called culture
wars and postmodernism.
1. I also thought Sokal's Social Text hoax to be brilliant and admirable.
I defended Sokal against left-type humanities friends who just refused to
accept the implicit criticisms.
2. I then was disturbed, mainly though journalistic accounts including
interviews with Sokal, at what I read as broad brush condemnation of a
great deal in post-War philosophy and philosophy of science.  Perhaps Sokal
is now more careful in limiting his scope to French philosophy, but I have
also seen from other distinguished scientists (I won't name names until I
have specific references) a wide-ranging and often unspecific attack on the
supposed dangers of 'postmodernism', used quite indiscriminately.  It has a
witch-hunt feel to it.  Also, my 'personal heros' include Kuhn, Lakatos,
and Feyerabend whose work has been tarred by this broad brush.
3. As a consequence of all this, I have come to abhor both sides of this
so-called debate.  Hence my unexplained provocative statements.



To:       John Kadvany/FAS/BAS/San Francisco CA/C&L/US at C&L US, Harvey
          Friedman <friedman at MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU>, fom at math.psu.edu
cc:
From:     davism at cs.nyu.edu (Martin Davis)
Date:     03/08/99 06:33:06 AM GMT
Subject:  Re: FOM: unexplained provocative statements




At 04:13 PM 3/5/99 -0800, john.kadvany at us.pwcglobal.com wrote:

>For hype see Sokal after his hoax and others who fan the reactionary
flames
>against the perceived threats of postmodernism.
>

There you go again: being provocative (and insulting) without backing up
what you say. Sokal (a personal hero) "reactionary" ? Please! I find he
(and
Bricmont) have bent over backward to be careful and precise. Where's the
hype? Where's the reactionary?

Above and beyond this example, please absorb Harvey's lesson: don't make
unsupported provocative statements.

Martin



----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.   If you received
 this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.