MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W319695447

AN Inconvenient Booth: Mistaking Symbol for Both Map and Territory

2013· article· en· W319695447 sur OpenAlex
Lukas Buterman

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueETC.: A Review of General Semantics · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePublic Spaces through Art
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSymbol (formal)Meaning (existential)CONTESTParliamentHuman rightsLawCode (set theory)SociologyHistoryPoliticsLinguisticsPolitical scienceComputer scienceEpistemologyPhilosophy
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In his famous phrase map is not the territory, Korzybski noted the disarming ease that human beings muddle abstractions of things for the things themselves. General semantics offers usefid tools to evaluate the contemporary contest over the territory of the prosaic public restroom--and its convenient or inconvenient booths--in the struggle fir equal rights for all people. In this paper, I demonstrate the intensional behavior exemplified by some statements by parliamentarians in debate and witnesses in testimony to committees of Canada's Parliament and Senate during the quest to amend legislation to add the phrase to Canada's federal Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. Noting that public facilities are often labeled locally, nationally, and internationally with pictographic symbol rather than written words, I seek to reveal relations between the symbol and the words purported to establish their meaning. What happens when the symbol ,for human becomes con fused with the map of human? Does such map bear similar structure to the territory represented? What extensional behaviors might assist this discussion? In 1967, the world flocked to Montreal, Canada for '67, where more than two-and-a-half times Canada's population as whole at the time attended (BIE, 1967 Montreal). One important innovation at '67 was of humble sort: public conveniences marked out in graphical, non-lingual symbol devised by Toronto designer Paul Arthur. - Arthur designed a series of 24 as part of comprehensive Standard Sign Manual [emphasis original] for use in the '67 site (Wainwright, 1967). Arthur's outline of humanoid figure with floating head--the detached, floating head itself an excellent sign that this representation is symbolic, not literally representing human--would remain recognizable today as symbol to indicate men's washroom; likewise, whilst Arthur's pictogram for the women's washroom was perhaps more matronly than the A-line dress we see so commonly on current symbol-signage, the shape would be recognizable as falling within the same general outlines. Today in 2013, observations suggest that we interpret these symbols with clarity that was missing from visitors to '67. According to 1967 news article from major Canadian daily newspaper, Expo is having trouble with its sign language, noting that [t]rouble soon arose over the washroom symbols. officials kept encountering that worried women [sic] who trotted nervously up to rest room door, examined the pictograph with some puzzlement, reached for handle, then retreated in blushing confusion as men appeared from inside (Plumptre, 1967). These days, pictogram symbols for washrooms are widely used in many nations, the pictograms themselves demonstrating near-limitless variety. And that, ladies and gents, brings us to an inconvenient booth, wherein we find mistaking symbol for both map and territory. The territory is the human in its imperfect glory, while the map is the construction of expectations of gender performance (Marissa, 2010) and the battleground is, apparently, that of transsexual and access to public conveniences (Cavanagh, 2011). Bizarre contortions of language--itself symbol--are used to delegiti-mize trans identities to imply or even state outright that trans do not have right to relief Indeed, even the notion of trails as people is sometimes contested, [b]ecause most have great difficulty recognizing the humanity of another person if they cannot recognize that person's gender... (Stryker, 2008, p.6). Even in Canada, anti-relief rhetoric relies on claims of possible abuse of claimed gender identity as legitimate reason to pre-emptively ban any such individuals from such relief on the notion that someone, someday, might somehow do something bad and, just in case, no one should be able to use the John--or should that be Jane? …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,365
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,533

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,338
Écart entre enseignants0,319 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle