In support of Roy Poses comments.
I will sit back and watch with great interest the attempt to reconcile the
rigourous, logical principles of EBM and the brand of meaningless
postmodernist ramblings with which I have some experience.
interested list members might like to review the events surrounding the now
infamous hoax article by Alan Sokal. Suggest you start with:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/index.html
Other postmodernist genius is displayed at a number of sites.
An example of postmodernist writing from the site below:
'Here, spotted for us by Dave Roden of Central Queensland University in
Australia, is the very first sentence of Professor Jameson's book,
Signatures of the Visible (Routledge, 1990, p. 1):
"The visual is essentially pornographic, which is to say that it has its end
in rapt, mindless fascination; thinking about its attributes becomes an
adjunct to that, if it is unwilling to betray its object; while the most
austere films necessarily draw their energy from the attempt to repress
their own excess (rather than from the more thankless effort to discipline
the viewer)."
The appreciative Mr. Roden says it is "good of Jameson to let readers know
so soon what they're up against." We cannot see what the second "that" in
the sentence refers to. And imagine if that uncertain "it" were willing to
betray its object? The reader may be baffled, but then any author who thinks
visual experience is essentially pornographic suffers confusions no lessons
in English composition are going to fix.'
Have fun!
http://www.nas.org/philosophy/logos.htm
Mike Bennett
Sydney
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|