Some information about me and my potential biases may be appropriate, given the circumstances of this controversy.

I know Alan Sokal casually, as a fellow mathematical physicist. We probably met once in the last ten years, and we have a relative Erdös number of 2. His work is good - your NSF dollars are well spent if he has grant support. I was certainly not even remotely in on his prank, and he had no role in the writing of this article.

I do not know any of the other people mentioned in this article, and am uncertain how many I had heard of before reading Gross and Levitt's book, except for Stanley Fish, as the author of the somewhat charming Is there a text in this class?.


The OAMSRPDAAS is indeed a lifelong believer in science, scientific objectivity, and the existence of a real universe independent of human thought (knowable, but imperfectly). I have tried to keep current with philosophy of science since my undergraduate days, especially as it concerns quantum mechanics. To a lesser degree, I have been aware of the postmodern literary critical movement for at least 15 years, but have found it neither threatening nor very enlightening.


Like many other academics, I make independent political judgments, which turn out to be demographically predictable. I have been actively involved in political issues related to science, especially arms control, as a former member of the executive committee of the American Physical Society's Forum on Physics and Society. This was done more out of a feeling that it was important than because of any ideological commitment.