|
I think what Sokal did was valid in its criticism of academic publishing. What I'm a bit uncomfortable with though was the way in which the whole affair was jumped on with an almost gleeful enthusiasm by those who wanted to use it as evidence of a certain fraudulance within academic departments. That kind of fraudulance does exist but it wasn't helpful to focus on a single instance without also looking at how departments have been forced to lower their standards and publish work that clearly isn't worthy just in order to secure the funding necessary for them to survive.
|