© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

Terms Privacy Legal Notice

Routledge eBooks

Sexed Equations and Vexed Physicists: the 'two cultures' revisited

Christopher Norris

Published Oct 30, 2020• 0 citations

Abstract

For Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont this is symptomatic of a widespread intellectual malaise that also goes under the various names of 'post-structuralism', 'literary theory', 'cultural criticism', 'deconstruction', or – on somewhat different but related grounds – the 'strong programme' in sociology of knowledge. The repercussions are rumbling on in various quarters of scientific and literary-cultural academe. They have also provoked a stream of commentary in the up-market dailies and weeklies where the 'Sokal Affair has become a main focus for debate about the current 'Science Wars, themselves basically just another outbreak of the old 'Two Cultures controversy initiated by C.P. Snow in the early 1960s. The trouble is that a great deal of quantum-theoretical debate — including some by eminent physicists — has likewise 'gone overboard' in various speculative directions, beginning with Bohr's obscurely metaphysical thoughts on the topic and continuing with the kinds of argument advanced by adherents of the 'many-minds' and 'many-worlds' interpretations.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003061632-10

Related papers

Intellectual Impostures. By Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. By John von Neumann

Shu‐Kun Lin

Entropy•Jun 30, 2000•1 citation

Minds, quantum measurement, and gravity

Michael Berry

Roger Penrose has provoked a great deal of discussion and controversy with his recent book The Emperor's New Mind(Oxford University Press 1989). (For a summary and review of the book's arguments by Frank Tipler, see Physics World, November 1989, p45) Its main proposal is that three problems which are usually regarded as separate are actually part of the same problem, and so might eventually find a common solution.

Physics World•Oct 1, 1990•0 citations

Quantum Controversy and Marxism

Freire Jr. Olival

L'analyse de la polemique existant entre les marxistes et la physique quantique a permis de mieux comprendre la relation entre la science et l'ideologie

Historia scientiarum. Second series : international journal of the History of Science Society of Japan•Dec 25, 1997•10 citations

The Knowable and the Unknowable: Modern Science, Nonclassical Thought, and the "Two Cultures"

Arkady Plotnitsky

This book investigates the relationships between modern mathematics and science (in particular, quantum mechanics) and the mode of theorizing that Arkady Plotnitsky defines as and identifies in the work of Bohr, Heisenberg, Lacan, and Derrida. Plotinsky argues that their scientific and philosophical works radically redefined the nature and scope of our knowledge. Building upon their ideas, the book finds a new, nonclassical character in the dream of great interconnections Bohr described, thereby engaging with recent debates about the two cultures (the humanities and the sciences).Plotnitsky highlights those points at which the known gives way to the unknown (and unknowable). These points are significant, he argues, because they push the boundaries of thought and challenge the boundaries of disciplinarity. One of the book's most interesting observations is that key figures in science, in order to push toward a framing of the unknown, actually retreated into a conservative disciplinarity. Plotnitsky's informed, interdisciplinary approach is more productive than the disparaging attacks on postmodernism or scientism that have hitherto characterized this discourse.Arkady Plotnitsky is Professor of English and Director, Theory and Cultural Studies Program, Purdue University. Trained in both mathematics and literary theory, he is author of several books, including In the Shadow of Hegel: Complementarity, History and the Unconscious and Reconfigurations: Critical Theory and General Economy.

•Jan 1, 2002•33 citations

The Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in Post-War Italy's Cultural Context

Flavio Del Santo

After World War II, a hyper-pragmatic paradigm was established in physics in most of the western countries, within which foundations of quantum mechanics were vastly dismissed as pointless speculations. In this paper, we show that in Italy, however, the interest toward quantum foundations was revived at the turn of the 1960s, mainly thanks to the initiative of Franco Selleri, who started criticising the contents and the practice of modern physics (in the context of capitalistic society), and thought that the solution was to be sought in a rethinking of the foundations of the discipline. In 1969, supported by Luis de Broglie himself, Selleri wrote a paper reviving the idea of hidden variables and he successfully proposed to the Italian Physical Society to devote the "Varenna School" of 1970 to quantum foundations. This school's historical pivotal importance is twofold: it gathered some of the most preeminent international physicists working on the foundations of quantum theory; and it provided a first platform for young physicists to express their dissatisfaction towards "scientism". In fact, Selleri's highly politicised views found the favour of a critical mass of young, left-wing physicists, who made of quantum foundations their main topic of research in the 1970s. Although these physicists understood very early the central importance of Bell's theorem, their (ideological) aim was to demonstrate that quantum theory could have limits of validity. Such a research program turned out to be unsuccessful, yet the Italian endeavour was worldwide one of the first and most significant revivals of the interest towards quantum foundations.

arXiv:2011.11969•Nov 24, 2020•0 citations

Revisiting the Sokal Hoax

Ronald McKinney, Symposium

In the first section of my paper, I want to consider the “paradoxes of complementarity” between polarised notions such as the quantum concepts of “wave” and “particle.” I will argue that if we treat this topic with all the “gravity” it deserves, we will be able to understand once and for all why this debate (and others like it) can never be completely resolved (paradox intended). In the second section, I want to consider the notion of “parody.” At the end, astute readers must determine for themselves whether I can be trusted to mean what I say, or whether this is all merely ironic, a post-modern hoax, one that undercuts the very boundaries it installs.

Symposium•Jan 1, 2010•0 citations

For Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont this is symptomatic of a widespread intellectual malaise that also goes under the various names of 'post-structuralism', 'literary theory', 'cultural criticism', 'deconstruction', or – on somewhat different but related grounds – the 'strong programme' in sociology of knowledge. The repercussions are rumbling on in various quarters of scientific and literary-cultural academe. They have also provoked a stream of commentary in the up-market dailies and weeklies where the 'Sokal Affair has become a main focus for debate about the current 'Science Wars, themselves basically just another outbreak of the old 'Two Cultures controversy initiated by C.P. Snow in the early 1960s. The trouble is that a great deal of quantum-theoretical debate — including some by eminent physicists — has likewise 'gone overboard' in various speculative directions, beginning with Bohr's obscurely metaphysical thoughts on the topic and continuing with the kinds of argument advanced by adherents of the 'many-minds' and 'many-worlds' interpretations.

This book investigates the relationships between modern mathematics and science (in particular, quantum mechanics) and the mode of theorizing that Arkady Plotnitsky defines as and identifies in the work of Bohr, Heisenberg, Lacan, and Derrida. Plotinsky argues that their scientific and philosophical works radically redefined the nature and scope of our knowledge. Building upon their ideas, the book finds a new, nonclassical character in the dream of great interconnections Bohr described, thereby engaging with recent debates about the two cultures (the humanities and the sciences).Plotnitsky highlights those points at which the known gives way to the unknown (and unknowable). These points are significant, he argues, because they push the boundaries of thought and challenge the boundaries of disciplinarity. One of the book's most interesting observations is that key figures in science, in order to push toward a framing of the unknown, actually retreated into a conservative disciplinarity. Plotnitsky's informed, interdisciplinary approach is more productive than the disparaging attacks on postmodernism or scientism that have hitherto characterized this discourse.Arkady Plotnitsky is Professor of English and Director, Theory and Cultural Studies Program, Purdue University. Trained in both mathematics and literary theory, he is author of several books, including In the Shadow of Hegel: Complementarity, History and the Unconscious and Reconfigurations: Critical Theory and General Economy.

After World War II, a hyper-pragmatic paradigm was established in physics in most of the western countries, within which foundations of quantum mechanics were vastly dismissed as pointless speculations. In this paper, we show that in Italy, however, the interest toward quantum foundations was revived at the turn of the 1960s, mainly thanks to the initiative of Franco Selleri, who started criticising the contents and the practice of modern physics (in the context of capitalistic society), and thought that the solution was to be sought in a rethinking of the foundations of the discipline. In 1969, supported by Luis de Broglie himself, Selleri wrote a paper reviving the idea of hidden variables and he successfully proposed to the Italian Physical Society to devote the "Varenna School" of 1970 to quantum foundations. This school's historical pivotal importance is twofold: it gathered some of the most preeminent international physicists working on the foundations of quantum theory; and it provided a first platform for young physicists to express their dissatisfaction towards "scientism". In fact, Selleri's highly politicised views found the favour of a critical mass of young, left-wing physicists, who made of quantum foundations their main topic of research in the 1970s. Although these physicists understood very early the central importance of Bell's theorem, their (ideological) aim was to demonstrate that quantum theory could have limits of validity. Such a research program turned out to be unsuccessful, yet the Italian endeavour was worldwide one of the first and most significant revivals of the interest towards quantum foundations.

In the first section of my paper, I want to consider the “paradoxes of complementarity” between polarised notions such as the quantum concepts of “wave” and “particle.” I will argue that if we treat this topic with all the “gravity” it deserves, we will be able to understand once and for all why this debate (and others like it) can never be completely resolved (paradox intended). In the second section, I want to consider the notion of “parody.” At the end, astute readers must determine for themselves whether I can be trusted to mean what I say, or whether this is all merely ironic, a post-modern hoax, one that undercuts the very boundaries it installs.