Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science” as Want to Read:
Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating

Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science

3.89 of 5 stars 3.89  ·  rating details  ·  843 ratings  ·  85 reviews
In 1996, Alan Sokal published an essay in the hip intellectual magazine Social Text parodying the scientific but impenetrable lingo of contemporary theorists. Here, Sokal teams up with Jean Bricmont to expose the abuse of scientific concepts in the writings of today's most fashionable postmodern thinkers. From Jacques Lacan and Julia Kristeva to Luce Irigaray and Jean Baud
Paperback, 320 pages
Published October 29th 1999 by Picador (first published 1997)
more details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Fashionable Nonsense, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Fashionable Nonsense

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 2,279)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  rating details
Assessing the usefulness or relevance of philosophy is a seemingly confounding endeavor. It becomes even trickier when approaching a specifically nuanced trend or style of philosophy. Since endless question-begging thought cycles are the genesis of any given philosophy, there is understandable difficulty in posing additional ones that might trump the foundation of that given philosopher's logic or reasoning. To add to that, there is the incessant theoretical backpedaling and earnest apologetics ...more
In 1996, Alan Sokal submitted an article to Social Text entitled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity." If that title means little to you, that's OK because the article was, in fact, nonsense. It was part of an elaborate hoax and parody that Sokal was perpetrating on those who subscribe to "epistemic relativism," i.e., the belief that modern science is nothing more than myth, a "social construction."

This philosophy is particularly endemic to mod
Lane Wilkinson
Sep 10, 2007 Lane Wilkinson rated it 4 of 5 stars
Recommends it for: anyone sick of the post-modern hegemony
Shelves: postmodernism
"We can clearly see that there is no bi-univocal correspondence between linear signifying links or archi-writing, depending on the author, and this multireferential, multi-dimensional machinic catalysis. The symmetry of scale, the transversality, the pathic non-discursive character of their expansion: all these dimensions remove us from the logic of the excluded middle and reinforce us in our dismissal of the ontological binarism we criticised previously"

This quote, from psychoanalyst Félix Guat
Jul 08, 2010 Keely marked it as to-read
Why is it that whenever a theory of social science is found to be flawed, and loses the respect of the scientific community, it manages to find new success as a branch of literary criticism? Freud's theories are by this point laughable, and yet they persist as viable modes of literary analysis. Marx's tautological economic theories have gone the same way. If I had to predict, I'd say Chomsky is up next.

There is a point at which ahistoricism and structuralism are willing to accept any method, any
This is a book that serves its modest purpose reasonably well, but after finishing it, I was left mostly wondering whether it was a purpose that needed to be served.

First, a note on context -- this book was co-authored by Alan Sokal, the perpetrator of the (in)famous Sokal Hoax. I won't describe or weigh in on the hoax here, since there has been a lot said about it elsewhere (this article by Michael Bérubé is a good even-handed retrospective), and also because this book is a much less inherently
I think it's crucial that respectable academics stop purveying semantically vacuous nonsense that egregiously expropriates terms that have precise scientific meanings, with demonstrably no understanding whatever of those meanings, for the purpose of furthering an atmosphere of moral equivalency for sense and nonsense. (I use the word "respectable" contextually: the perpetrators of this furtherance of discursive entropy are respected by many of the academics within their own fields.)
Dave Brick
If you've ever had to read the postmodernist writings of Focault, Derrida, Lacan, or any of their innumerable disciples and come away with only the vaguest idea as to their meaning, you might want to read this book. But if like me, you regularly have to encounter postmodernism in the flesh and just don't get it, this is a must-read. It will reassure you that incoherent sentences mixed shameless displays of (false) erudition--although extremely humorous--cannot change the fact that reason, eviden ...more
Worthless Bum
Alan Sokal is known for having written a splendid parody known as the "Sokal Hoax", a paper submitted and published in the journal "Social Text" which criticizes certain academic trends in literary criticism, philosophy, and sociology, such trends being largely influenced by certain French philosophers. Categorizing these trends and philosophies under the regrettably vague moniker "postmodernism" (a term whose vagueness owes itself in no small part to the tendency for obscurity, inconsistency, a ...more
I wanted to like this, I really did. It was completely relevant to my interests. I'm sick of the contempt for the sciences communicated by the humanities even after their post-60s dialogue with scientific language. I think that actually understanding the concepts one uses to break down the convention of analogy is interesting. I don't think that the doubts and complexities of actual science are fundamentally responsible for political and social damage. Sokal could have been moderate, understandi ...more
Although this is an important book, it is not a very enjoyable one to read, for the simple fact that the authors felt compelled to quote at length from some of the most disfigured and meaningless jumbles of words that I have ever seen sewn together in the guise of sentences.

A major portion of the book is given over to reproductions of original 'postmodernist' sources that ramble for pages on end, with trifling comments by the authors on how the different scientific concepts have been misinterpre
Raffaele Indri
Che bello questo saggio, penso fosse una delle cose che più desideravo leggere e che però pensavo non esistessero. Purtroppo nomi quali Lacan e Irigaray sono tuttora ancora estremamente ritenuti, sia negli ambienti accademico-universitari sia nella cultura, per così dire, più «popolare» (basti pensare a quanto sia facile leggere recensioni cinematografiche che parlano delle immagini-tempo deleuziane et similia). Purtroppo il postmodernismo – tendenza contemporanea che, per stessa ammissione degl ...more
One will never be grateful enough to Sokal and Bricmont for pointing fingers towards a naked emperor. Being French, I know far too well how postmodernism/poststructuralism/social constructivism (or whatever other stupid name a certain intelligentsia wants to call itself) damaged a whole field of academics and, as such, modern intellectual life and debate. Stemming from the like of Lacan, Deleuze, Kristeva, Baudrillard, Irigaray, Latour, Virilio and co (to name just the ones targeted here) there ...more
Oh, how badly the Left needs more books like this, boldly championing scientific objectivity and facts over political or spiritual ideologies that abuse science to gain legitimacy and further their agendas.

The story of the origin of this book is a playful one: the author submitted a parody article, called Transgressing the Boundaries, to a postmodern scientific journal. In it he demonstrates every abuse of science he's seen, conflating subjects that have nothing to do with each other, exaggerati
Leila T.
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.
I'm not a fan of much academic work that tends to be considered 'postmodernist' (well, maybe I agree with the conclusions often enough - I'm a fairly radical relativist on a lot of things, for example - but I can't get down with the style), and I'm definitely not a fan of academics writing at length about subjects of which they have little understanding, so this book is largely preaching to the converted with me. Still, it was kinda surprising just how utterly ridiculous some of the works discus ...more
This book started off as a prank when Sokal sent an article to Social Text which was full of nonsense, but used pomo's vague and pompous style and confirmed some of their social/political beliefs. The editors, excited that a physicist has converted to their side, promptly published the article. Once caught, they refused to publish the subsequent paper in which Sokal explained the reason for his prank and how absurd the first article had been.

Richard Dawkins said it best in one of his essays in
I would have given it five-stars if not for all the semantically incoherent non-sequiturs quoted ad nauseum. But that's just me being post-postmodernism in seminal abrasiveness of the complacence of fashionable academia and all its derivatives (e.g. math, physics, chemistry; i.e. anything non contained within the set of non-humanities or social sciences {i.e. set of non-humanities conjoined with the set of non-social-sciences}). Neither complete or consistent due to the implications of Godel's t ...more
This book intelligently and hilariously calls out postmodern criticism on everything that makes me completely disgusted by it. The authors (both of whom are physicists) summarize their work this way:

"Let us start by recognizing that many 'postmodern' ideas, expressed in a moderate form, provide a needed correction to naive modernism (belief in indefinite and continuous progress, scientism, cultural Eurocentrism, etc.)."
"Our focus [in this book] is limited to certain intellectual aspects of postm
Benedict Reid
If you ever find yourself thinking the postmodern French philosophers actually have a point. This is the book you need to read. It is simply undeniable proof that postmodern thinking is word-games, not actual theories. More sense is in these pages than most undergraduate arts degrees.
Jurij Fedorov
Great and factual message in a mediocre package. The Blank Slate has the same message and idea in a much better communication. This book is recommended for mathematicians and physicists.

Sokal is a good mind in the hard scientes. He disproves a lot of awful mathematics and physics made by world famous and respected social scientists. If you love either of these two sciences you will probably find this book informative and interesting.

As much as I respect Sokal and his keen intellect I sti
The authors do the only thing you can do to fight post-modernism. Point to it and beg everyone to realize that it's total B.S.
“Not all that is obscure is necessarily profound.” (186)

Jampacked with sarcastic criticism, hilariously awful postmodernist quotes, and brief clarifications of confused science and math, Fashionable Nonsense is excellent. Because words are hard, I'll let the authors speak for themselves:

“This book deals with mystification, deliberately obscure language, confused thinking, and the misuse of scientific concepts.” (xi)

“The word ‘abuse’ here denotes one or more of the following characteristics:
Ferda Nihat Koksoy
ŞAKANIN ARDINDAN-Postmodernizmin Bilimsel, Felsefi ve Kültürel Eleştirisi-
Kitaptan Alıntılar ve Sentezler:
***Duke Üniversitesi tarafından yayınlanan ve postmodernistlerin ağırlıkta olduğu SOCIAL TEXT dergisinde yayınlattığı sosyal içerikli uzun makalenin, aslında bilerek yanlışlarla doldurulmuş bir şaka olduğunu, bu yanlışların fark bile edilmediğini; bu durumun bilinen en önemli isimler için (Lacan, Derrida, Lyotard, Deleuze, Guattari, Baudrillard vb.)
En este libro se exponen algunos de los abusos que comenten algunos pensadores y filosofos de la corriente posmodernista, del uso de conceptos matemáticos, físicos y de otras ciencias, para adornar su discurso, o para exponer puntos de vista triviales o banales. Se hace una revisión de algunas referencias que hicieron uso los autores para redactar una parodia de un artículo de esta corriente; en dicha revisión se expone con rigor las falacias en las que caen los autores de dichas referencias.
On display is lots of nonsense written in the postmodern tradition, specifically by philosophers that can basically be classified as epistemic relativists. In the first several chapters, the responses by the authors to absurd passages from Lacan and Kristeva are quite detailed. As the book goes on, punctuated by several intermezzo chapters which give some background, much of the commentary becomes lazy. The authors begin to appeal to the self-evidence of the ridiculousness on display.

David Glenn Dixon
Washington City Paper
Arts & Entertainment : Book Review

Liberté, Egalité, Obscurité
By Glenn Dixon • March 12, 1999

"If there's no math in it, it isn't science." Thus went the rejoinder propellerheads offered religious enthusiasts when, in the '80s, hinterland zealots attempted to get Genesis taught in public schools under the rubric of "creation science." But what of the inverse? If there is math in it, is science an inevitability? As any kid who sat through the first month of Mr. Glahn's 9th-
Daniel Maturana
This is a must read for anyone that has been exposed to so-called 'postmodern' thinkers. Personally, I think many of the ideas put forth by postmodern philosophers are intriguing, specially if not taken too seriously (which in many cases seems to actually be the intent). But I find the clueless use of mathematical and scientific jargon to appear more authorative ridiculous. It is rather entertaining to see some of the most pompous philosophers' absurd statements dissected. The book also has a su ...more
Dorian Neerdael
Ce livre vient donner suite à ce qu'on a appelé l'affaire Sokal. Il vient approfondir l'opinion de ce physicien qui avait déjà montré au monde scientifique son dégoût pour tout le verbiage postmoderne.

En tant que scientifique, il se permet d'analyser les passages mathématisant, physicalisant ou logicisant de certains ouvrages philosophiques influents. Il constate que le langage scientifique compliqué est souvent utilisé pour noyer les lecteurs dans une pseudo-érudition, et pour donner à un texte
This is a very interesting follow-up to the famous "Sokal hoax", wherein physicist Alan Sokal wrote an spoof article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", and then submitted it to Social Text, a leading postmodern journal that publishes articles in the area of "science studies". As he suspected, the journal accepted the article, and what's more selected it for a special upcoming issue on the topic. In this book, Sokal discusses the background ...more
Sokal and Bricmont launch a devastating critique of the pretentious and obscurantist tendencies of several authors in the pomo canon in this book. Their specific locus of attack is these philosophers' (and I use the term here in a very loose sense) misuse and deliberate abuse of scientific and mathematical concepts as a strategy to embellish and give an aura of credibility to very bad writing.

[A caveat: I'm not a philosopher, physicist, mathematician, literary theorist, psychoanalyst or even we
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 75 76 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
  • Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science
  • Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge
  • The Two Cultures & A Second Look: An Expanded Version of The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution
  • Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science
  • Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction
  • Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings
  • Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness
  • The Logic of Scientific Discovery
  • The Construction of Social Reality
  • The Social Construction of What?
  • Biology as Ideology: The Doctrine of DNA
  • Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues
  • Introducing Semiotics
  • The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution
  • Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited
  • The Oxford Companion to the Mind
  • Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud
  • Darwin Among The Machines: The Evolution Of Global Intelligence
Alan David Sokal (born 1955) is a professor of mathematics at University College London and professor of physics at New York University. He works in statistical mechanics and combinatorics. To the general public he is best known for his criticism of postmodernism, resulting in the Sokal affair in 1996.

Sokal received his B.A. from Harvard College in 1976 and his Ph.D. from Princeton University in 1
More about Alan Sokal...
Beyond the Hoax: Science, Philosophy and Culture Impostures intellectuelles (SCIENCE HUM) Random Walks, Critical Phenomena, and Triviality in Quantum Field Theory

Share This Book

“We have seen in this book numerous ambiguous texts that can be interpreted in two different ways: as an assertion that is true but relatively banal, or as one that is radical but manifestly false. And we cannot help thinking that, in many cases, these ambiguities are deliberate. Indeed, they offer a great advantage in intellectual battles: the radical interpretation can serve to attract relatively inexperienced listeners or readers; and if the absurdity of this version is exposed, the author can always defend himself by claiming to have been misunderstood, and retreat to the innocuous interpretation.” 4 likes
“A mode of thought does not become 'critical' simply by attributing that label to itself, but by virtue of its content.” 4 likes
More quotes…