The MacLamity

The News That Stays News, Reported Live

Thursday, May 12, 2005


I'm very late to this story about this robot-age version of the Sokal hoax. It's amazing that computers can do what 10 years ago could only be done by a disgruntled physicist with perfect aim. And 10 years from now? We'll have robots that can perfectly imitate credulous humanities professors who are desperate for contributions to their sad-sack scholarly journals. The opening of "Rooter" is indistinguishable from scholarly prose, in terms of style (impenetrable) and content (none, even after successful penetration!).
Many scholars would agree that, had it not been for activenetworks, the simulation of Lamport clocks might never have occurred. The notion that end-users synchronize with the investigation of Markov models is rarely outdated. A theoretical grand challenge in theory is the important unificationof virtual machines and real-time theory. To what extent can web browsers be constructed to achieve this purpose? Certainly, the usual methods for the emulation of Smalltalk that paved the way for the investigation of rasterization do not apply in this area. In the opinions of many, despite thefact that conventional wisdom states that this grand challengeis continuously answered by the study of access points, webelieve that a different solution is necessary. It should be noted that Rooter runs in Ω(log log n) time. Certainly, the shortcoming of this type of solution, however, is that compilersand superpages are mostly incompatible. Despite the fact thatsimilar methodologies visualize XML, we surmount this issue without synthesizing distributed archetypes.We question the need for digital-to-analog converters. Itshould be noted that we allow DHCP to harness homogeneous epistemologies without the evaluation of evolutionary programming [2], [12], [14]. Contrarily, the lookaside buffer might not be the panacea that end-users expected. However,this method is never considered confusing. Our approach turns the knowledge-base communication sledgehammer into a scalpel.
And compare it with the older hoax you realize that editorial standards at scholarly journals can only have got worse, or maybe Sokal just didn't push his prose as far to prose catastrophe as he could have:
There are many natural scientists, and especially physicists, who continue to reject the notion that the disciplines concerned with social and cultural criticism can have anything to contribute, except perhaps peripherally, to their research. Still less are they receptive to the idea that the very foundations of their worldview must be revised or rebuilt in the light of such criticism. Rather, they cling to the dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook, which can be summarized briefly as follows: that there exists an external world, whose properties are independent of any individual human being and indeed of humanity as a whole; that these properties are encoded in ``eternal'' physical laws; and that human beings can obtain reliable, albeit imperfect and tentative, knowledge of these laws by hewing to the ``objective'' procedures and epistemological strictures prescribed by the (so-called) scientific method.

But deep conceptual shifts within twentieth-century science have undermined this Cartesian-Newtonian metaphysics1; revisionist studies in the history and philosophy of science have cast further doubt on its credibility2; and, most recently, feminist and poststructuralist critiques have demystified the substantive content of mainstream Western scientific practice, revealing the ideology of domination concealed behind the façade of ``objectivity''.3 It has thus become increasingly apparent that physical ``reality'', no less than social ``reality'', is at bottom a social and linguistic construct; that scientific ``knowledge", far from being objective, reflects and encodes the dominant ideologies and power relations of the culture that produced it; that the truth claims of science are inherently theory-laden and self-referential; and consequently, that the discourse of the scientific community, for all its undeniable value, cannot assert a privileged epistemological status with respect to counter-hegemonic narratives emanating from dissident or marginalized communities. These themes can be traced, despite some differences of emphasis, in Aronowitz's analysis of the cultural fabric that produced quantum mechanics4; in Ross' discussion of oppositional discourses in post-quantum science5; in Irigaray's and Hayles' exegeses of gender encoding in fluid mechanics6; and in Harding's comprehensive critique of the gender ideology underlying the natural sciences in general and physics in particular.7