Hehe.

Fine.

However, the concrete  abstract seems very promising for a theologian.
It is clear that Boudry know the concepts that he manage. His abstract
is a piece of cake, it is a "I solved the Teologian problem of our
time!" . It is not pure gibberish.

Remenber that the Sokal affair was around a complete article, not an
abstract. I know that a great number of hoax papers are submitted and
accepted in scientific press.Many of them are not for joking purposes,
but for people that want relevance, fame and money. This hasn´t  to
undermine hard sciences. ( Not in the case of modern cultural and
gender studies  that are pure indoctrination )

In my particular case, I worked in European I+D projects where
subsidies depended on the imagination, the length of the documents and
the appropriate use of buzzwords.

Alberto.

2012/9/29 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>:
> John Clark at least will appreciate this.  :-)
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> To: Skeptic <skep...@lists.johnshopkins.edu>
>
>
> http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/a-sokal-style-hoax-by-an-anti-religious-philosopher-2/
> -----
> But today I’m presenting something else: a real Sokal-style hoax that
> Boudry has perpetrated. He informed me yesterday that he had submitted
> a fake, post-modernish and Sophisticated-Theological™ abstract to two
> theology conferences:
>
> "By the way, I thought you might find this funny. I wrote a spoof
> abstract full of theological gibberish (Sokal-style) and submitted it
> to two theology conferences, both of which accepted it right away. It
> got into the proceedings of the Reformational Philosophy conference.
> See Robert A. Maundy (an anagram of my name) on p. 22 of the program
> proceedings."
> -----
>
> The comments are worth reading too.
>
> ===============================================================
>
>
>
> And there is a most excellent review/refutation of Plantinga's "Where the
> Conflict Really Lies" by Boudry here (I notice he credits Yonatan Fishman
> among others):
>
>
> http://ihpst.net/newsletters/sept-oct2012.pdf
>
> Here's a snippet:
>
> "In much of what passes as sophisticated theology these days, the term ‘God’
> does no explanatory
> work at all, but functions as an intellectual vanishing point, a bundle of
> all explanatory loose ends.
> God is simply equated with the uncaused cause, the ground of all being, as
> that-which-does-notrequire-
> further-explanation."
>
> Brent
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.



-- 
Alberto.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to