Talk:Postmodern social construction of nature

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 September 2007. The result of the discussion was No consensus..

Philosophy: Social and political / Continental / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy
	Continental philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Query

in the last sentence under Criticism, there's ref to the Wapner Paradox. Afaik there is no WP, but there is the Banach–Tarski paradox (or the Euclidian one?) and Leonard M. Wapner is a math guy who wrote a short work about it called The Pea and the Sun. Can someone clarify please? 110.32.248.83 (talk) 04:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC) Manytexts (sorry can't get my password atm)[reply]

No idea. The article looks like a spoof. Candidate for deletion? Theeurocrat (talk) 18:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Description as "theorem"

Is the word "theorem" used with a different meaning than the usual mathematical one in contexts like this? This doesn't look anything like a theorem, but I don't really understand what the article is trying to say enough to re-phrase it sensibly. 188.164.31.97 (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]