Sokal Prove)Hickey 5Sokal is just trying to point out the faults in the system. New York Times writer Stanley Fish sees the same idea. “Scholars with impeccable credentials making statements no sane person could credit (Fish). These scientists can make statements and no one will check them. Steve Weinberg, Nobel Prize in Physics and the National Medal of Science, points out “part of Sokal's hoax was in his description of developments in physics. Much of it was quite accurate, but it was heavily adulterated with howlers, most of which would have been detected by any undergraduate physics major”(- 5 -Weinberg). Now one could argue about the ‘trust’ that is put into scholars works. As Fish explains there must be faith taken when colleagues share information. “All work is not able to start from scratch so when one researcher is dependent on another faith plays a role in that colleague”(Fish). As editor of a leading journal you need to take some precautions. The idea of a hoax should always be on their mind. You can relate it to the idea of a young boy getting on the front cover of a major newspaper. The newspaper editors pay attention for people playing tricks to get in the paper. The editors have to protect their journal, not only from a hoax but any other such concerns that can go on.Hickey 6Looking back on an incident it is clear to see where mistakes are made. Social Text made many mistakes when publishing Sokal’s essay. First of all they published something they didn’t understand. The editors admitted that the physics was Greek to them. Second, they had no respect for Sokal which editor Bruce Robbins says,“From the first, we considered Sokal's unsolicited article to be a little hokey ... His adventures in PostmodernLand were not really our cup of tea”. The next mistake was publishing the article for political reasons. Again Robbins explains, “We thought it argued t...
