On the “Sokal Squared” Trio

“Now, this is not a review of the book, nor a critique of them personally but, rather, a critique of their function as public intellectuals.”

As the culture war rages on—and now with “cancel culture” and whether “2+2=4” is true (yes, really) being central topics of discussion—there are particular public figures who are bound to rise in prominence, not in the least because their public profiles were built on the culture war. Among the most salient, in my view, are the three authors of the Sokal Squared hoax, named after the original hoax by American physicist Alan Sokal. The three of them—Helen Pluckrose, James Lindsay, and Peter Boghossian—have devoted much of their public careers to criticizing cancel culture and what they call “grievance studies,” most recently in Pluckrose and Lindsay’s newly released book Cynical Theories. Now, this is not a review of the book, nor a critique of them personally but, rather, a critique of their function as public intellectuals. I think the three of them are interesting because they are representative of a larger phenomenon that seems inevitably tied to culture warring. To be sure, cancel culture is a problem in some sectors of the Left, and the type of scholarship these three writers criticize—which is overwhelmingly left-aligned—has real issues, and many on the Left have pointed this out (a fact, by the way, which they often ignore). Now, I even believe some of their specific critiques are warranted. Yet, I think who makes certain critiques—and why—is an essential piece of information.

To critique their positions on these matters, even if there is some agreement, is necessary for the Left because the direction in which the criticism is pushing matters. Importantly, I believe their criticism of disciplines such as critical and feminist theory is sloppy and unserious. In many ways, they fall into the exact form of ideologically motivated reasoning that they (sometimes correctly) accuse scholars of these disciplines of using. Of course, this is a strong claim, so I will do my best to substantiate it in what follows. There are three threads that run through Boghossian, Lindsay, and Pluckrose’s general argument that I think merit the most interest. First of these is their approach to what they group under the umbrella term “grievance studies.” Second and third—which are related—is their treatment of questions of truth and reality in themselves, and of epistemology, the way we know whether we are arriving at truth and reality.

Fields of study like feminist philosophy and critical theory (whether it be race, gender, or others), and importantly, anything related to intersectionality, all fall under “grievance studies.” Their attack on these disciplines is what originally put them in the public spotlight, particularly through the publication of various papers in gender studies journals. This is the reason behind the “Sokal Squared” moniker. Their successful publication has been described by them and by others as proof that these fields are little more than glorified sophistry. Let me preface everything that follows by saying that I do think that is an apt description of some works in the humanities. I think, however, the scope of their critique is too broad and goes much further than what the results of their hoax would allow. As an example, take on of the most publicized papers they published entitled “Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon.” The paper makes very bold claims about themes like rape culture as inferred from human reactions toward canine interactions. In particular, it claims to look at how humans react to dogs fighting and “humping” (initiating sex with) other dogs, in relation to the sex of the dog being humped. These claims are, of course, all false because everything claimed in the paper is false. The upshot is meant to be that since the claims in the paper—ridiculous as they may be—support a particular grievance narrative, the journal editors were keen to publish them because their purpose is advancing that narrative, rather than rigorous and scientific pursuit of truth.