MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4317702823 · doi:10.1353/tae.2023.0010

Radical Habits

2023· article· en· W4317702823 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathy E. Ferguson

Notice bibliographique

RevueTheory & Event · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMinor (academic)PoliticsHabitSociologyEpistemologyPhilosophyHumanitiesLawPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Radical Habits Kathy E. Ferguson (bio) Carolyn Pedwell. Revolutionary Routines: The Habits of Social Transformation. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2021. 223 pp. $34.95 (pb). ISBN: 9780228006220. This book focuses on habit as a site of “minor change” (p. xvii) that can become an alternative to larger processes of collective transformation. Drawing on a rich grounding in process philosophy, Pedwell defines habits as “moving assemblages that enable new affective, material, and political capacities and collectives to emerge.” (p. xvii) She focuses our attention on the political potential of interventions at the level of “the minor” without dispensing with “the major.” Rather, she seeks useful bridges between the two. She wants to “rethink the relationship between “the revolutionary” and “the routine” (p. xix) to see them as “fundamentally imbricated” so that “minor tendencies, gestures, and interactions may be just as important as major events.” (p. 11) Pedwell builds primarily on three “philosophers of habit” (p. 5): Felix Ravaisson, William James, and John Dewey, along with current process-oriented thinkers including Erin Manning, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Catherine Malabou, Eve Sedgwick, and others to develop her idea of “the minor”: “If the major is identified according to predetermined principles of value and significance, the minor is the unpredictable force which runs through it, creating possibilities for established rhythms and tendencies to materialise differently.” (p. xii) So major here does not necessarily mean bigger, it means more orthodox; while minor does not necessarily mean small, it means minoritarian. Pedwell initially defines affect as “a form of sensorial relationality productive of different kinds of interaction and becoming.” (p. xix) As the argument advances, she uses “affect” very broadly: “a varied collection of sensorial processes, relations, and experiences which range from individual expressions of feeling, to collective affective atmospheres, to more-than-human forces and relations.” (p. 28) I am not sure that it best serves her argument to collapse such a substantial range of sensations and relations into one term. I suspect that she loses an important distinction between a subject-centered feeling, which I would call emotion, and the larger terrain, which I would call affect, that enables a certain grammar of feeling. Pedwell takes greater care to preserve useful distinctions in her discussion of habit. She initially defines habit as “embodied technologies that bring forward (the result of) past actions into the present and future.”(p. xxii) Habits are always more than micro-level arrangements; they always entail “ongoing transactions” between individuals and others. (p xxiii) They are always embedded in assemblages of “permeable bodily processes and heterogeneous and changing milieus which are entangled within emergent ecologies.” (p. 17) She recalibrates habit to forge fresh connections to solidarity (“a moving assemblage of affects, gestures, and habits”). (p. 24) [End Page 216] Chapter 1 investigates the “double nature” of habits (p. 4): they can certainly sustain the status quo, but they can also “become otherwise.”(p. 6) While habits can be “automated repetition,” they can also be emergent opportunities for progressive activism. (p. 38) “Acquired predispositions,” as Dewey wrote, compose us in relations of bodies to their contexts; they may catalyze us into transformations and just as easily they may disperse “into ineffectual spray.” (p. 43) We can intervene in habit’s realm, and redirect its ongoing chain of actions to activate other possibilities, but without any sort of guarantee that the newly realized directions will be either predictable or preferable. Chapter 2 reflects on the racism and xenophobia in the Brexit campaign and the Trump election, telling stories of the habits of domination fostered in neoliberalism and white power. “Understanding white privilege through the logics of habit” helps us understand racism’s periodic retreat and predictable return in the mundane, not just the extraordinary, registers of politics. (p. 67) Aware that merely pointing to racism may only reinforce it, rather than challenge it, she suggests that a better approach is to reorient our modes of affective attention: to pay attention differently, to engage in material and ethical processes that may take us elsewhere. Chapter 3 takes on some of the purveyors of habit governance who are dangerous to Pedwell’s project, the advocates of “nudging” people via “subtle tweaks...

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)0,002
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: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,335
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
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 Opus0,038
Tête enseignante GPT0,356
Écart entre enseignants0,318 · 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'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
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
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTheory & EventMême sujetPosthumanist Ethics and ActivismTravaux en français237 207