Sokal et al

[Diana York Blaine]

But I don't want to build a bridge, I want to have a dialogue with the
people who do, about where, and why, and if.  I'd like the autocratic
demeanor that often rains down on the heads of those who look at life 
using different paradigms than physicists do and dare challenge "progress"
and "science" to  be exposed for what it is.  Perhaps some of us don't do
science because we don't want to. Does that eliminate our right to have an
informed, even professional, discussion about how and why it is done?
Diana

On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Cal McInvale wrote:

> 
> It's not a question of "rights." It's simply a matter of training and
> experience. Those trained to "do science" are apt to "do science" better
> than those trained in the humanities. Experience in the field further
> widens the gap.
> 
> Sure, one can "do the research" and perhaps offer an informed (as opposed
> to their previous) opinions on scientific matters. Certainly one would be
> in a position to ask precise questions at that point. No good scientist
> would object to this; in fact, most of us would praise anyone who did so,
> the state of scientific education being so poor these days. But it is a
> question of "how much" -- you don't expect to be able to build a bridge,
> solve Fermat's Last Theorem or fully comprehend quantum electrodynamics
> just by reading a few books, do you?
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------
> cal mcinvale                      entropy specialist
> calm at tpdinc.com                   tpd publishing inc.
> 
>      The fact that I beat a drum has nothing to do
>      with the fact that I do theoretical physics.
>                                 --Richard Feynmann
> 
>