>.. who I find to be nearly as difficult to read as the French pomo gurus
>themselves. So I gave up. Having a science/technology background, I get much
>more out of Noam Chomsky's or Alan Sokal's critical writings on these issues.
>For Sokal, see
>
>http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/index.html
>
>Is their stuff to simplicistic for the literature/philosphy crowd?
I'm not part of that crowd, but it's too simplistic for me - especially since Sokal has no idea what he's talking about. He assembled a pastiche of silly quotes, but he's never seriously read any of the folks he quotes. In fact, word is that he was calling all around asking those who had for appropriate morsels. Trond, you asked who were the non-vulgar anti-postmodernists; I don't think that being anti-postmodern (whatever that is, really) is a desirable thing in itself, but it will not do to denounce a diverse set of writers and schools of thought as foolish obscurantists, which is what Sokal did.
Doug