MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4254619420 · doi:10.1353/mos.2015.0034

Introduction

2015· article· en· W4254619420 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Dawne McCance

Notice bibliographique

RevueMosaic · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueGeographies of human-animal interactions
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSovereigntyHumanityPresumptionAfterlifePhilosophySociologyHistoryLawEpistemologyPolitical scienceTheologyPolitics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Dawne McCance This special Mosaic issue, the second of three conference proceedings issues, collects papers presented at the A matter of life death conference held at the University of Manitoba from October 1-4, 2014. Most of the papers have been revised, some lengthened, into publishable essay form and, as always, we are grateful to contributors for their cooperation and more than a little proud to print their fine work. The issue opens with Dr. Françoise Dastur’s conference Keynote Address, “Mourning as the Origin of Humanity.” Against still prevalent modes of thinking that elevate humans above animals, usually by focusing on something animals “lack,” Dastur, with particularly rich references to the Western philosophical tradition, approaches humans as “strange animals who bury their dead.” Although Dastur states that “There is indeed no experience of death as such,” other essays question whether Heidegger attributed such an experience to Dasein alone and, by so doing, reinstated the tradition’s man/animal binary. Ryan C.P. Fics, in “Our Sovereign Others: Phantasms, Heidegger, Animality,” examines the “presumption that human Dasein lives death as death,” and in the course of his essay considers the notions of “phantasm,” and “dying alive,” as these emerge from Derrida’s The Beast & the Sovereign seminars. “Sovereignty,” “phantasm,” and “death” are taken up as well in Gwynne Fulton’s “Phantasmatics: Sovereignty and the Image of Death in Derrida’s First Death Penalty Seminar.” And [End Page v] Kas Saghafi in “Dying Alive,” engaging Derrida’s second seminar on The Beast & the Sovereign, argues that “phantasm,” “dying alive,” and “survival” need to be thought in relation to, and with, each other. Again, “survival” is a title word in “Love, Life, Death, and Survival,” where Diane Enns, reading Derrida’s Learning to Live Finally alongside Gillian Rose’s memoir, Love’s Work, develops a poignant, poetic, and critical reflection on the death of a love. The importance of Derrida’s work for many presenters at the October conference is evident in this issue, as are the different ways in which writers draw insights from his treatments of life death. A remarkable example is Matthias Fritsch’s “Democracy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice,” which draws from a number of Derrida’s texts to develop the argument that democracy should be rethought as a matter of “taking turns,” and that such rethinking can lead to an environmentally responsible politics. James Martell in “The Animal Mirrors: The Human/Animal Divide in Derrida and Deleuze,” by way of Derrida’s critique of Deleuze, proposes a way of moving the question of human-animal relations “beyond the traps of narcissism.” The remaining six essays offer striking and diverse contributions to this issue. Antonio Calcagno, in “Individuated Embodiment and Action: Interrogating Roberto Esposito’s Negative Self,” offers a well-informed, timely, and critical evaluation of Esposito’s biopolitics. Kara Wentworth takes readers into today’s abattoir in “Sensing Sentience and Managing Microbes: Lifedeath in the Slaughterhouse.” In “Adapting Venice: Intermedial Relations in Visconti, Sebald, and Kafka,” Russell J.A. Kilbourn takes us to Venice through Luchino Visconti’s Death in Venice and Vertigo and W.G. Sebald’s first prose narrative, which adapts texts by Kafka. Dominique Hétu, in “Of Wonder and Encounter: Textures of Human and Nonhuman Relationality,” reads the novels Sous Béton and Room “as attempts to surpass the traditional and conventional life/death dichotomy by telling stories of trauma and near-death experiences through moments of wonder in meaningful encounters that bring to attention the vitality of the dead.” And last, but by no means least, are two compelling essays, Sung-Ae Lee’s “Lost in Liminal Space: Amnesiac and Incognizant Ghosts in Korean Drama” and Sarah Bezan’s “Necro-Eco: The Ecology of Death in Jim Crace’s Being Dead.” The issue reminds me of the wonder I experienced, as Mosaic Editor, at the range and quality of submissions we received from our conference Call for Papers. [End Page vi] Copyright © 2015 Mosaic

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.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
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 enseignants0,400
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
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)0,0010,001

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 Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,327
Écart entre enseignants0,287 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2015
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMosaicMême sujetGeographies of human-animal interactionsTravaux en français237 207