Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Sandra Tomsons and Lorraine Mayer eds., Philosophy and Aboriginal Rights: Critical Dialogues. Oxford: OUP Canada, 2013. 512 pages. ISBN 978-0-195-43130-8. $70.95 paperback.There is reason to believe that we have entered on a new sort of relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people (and peoples) in Canada. Some of these reasons are social or political, as in the increased profile of Aboriginal persons in various professional fields or the serious attention which a group such as Idle No More has received. Other reasons are more philosophical and involve the expression of uniquely Aboriginal perspectives on abstract issues and problems. Recognition of Native philosophy as a distinct sub-class of the discipline of philosophy is in its infancy, but while Aboriginal persons may be informed as to the content of these unique perspectives by virtue of being Aboriginal, non-Aboriginals are usually at a loss. There are not many sources to which one can turn for Native philosophy outside of Dennis McPherson and J. Douglas Rabb's Indian From the Inside: Native American Philosophy and Cultural Renewal (2nd ed., McFarland 2011) and Anne Waters's anthology American Indian Thought: Philosophical Essays (Wiley-Blackwell 2003). Aside from these, there is scant literature that would permit interested non-Aboriginal scholars to enter into dialogue with their Native counterparts or colleagues. It is this lack which Tomsons and Mayer's Philosophy and Aboriginal attempts to make good, at least with respect to the political and moral issue stated in its title. So this book is, I think, a welcome one.Fairness of representation requires exchange, and Tomsons and Mayer try to model this dialogue in their conversations which conclude each of the four parts into which the book is divided. Tomsons takes the position of the non-Aboriginal philosopher and Mayer the As artificial as this approach is, nevertheless it is still a step in the right direction. Further, the spiritual grandfathers of the project, Dennis McPherson and Douglas Rabb, provide a prologue for the work, cheekily titled to Any Further Discussion of That May be Considered Aboriginal. The other contributors to the volume also seem to exemplify this spirit of dialogue because twelve of the twenty-nine contributors identify themselves as being Aboriginal or as having Aboriginal ancestry. The division of the book into sections - on the relation of Indigenous philosophy to Aboriginal rights, on the content of those rights, on the notion of Aboriginal sovereignty, and on possible avenues for reconciliation of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal views on these matters - is entirely appropriate and just what one should expect from something that purports to make heard the previously-silent Native voices on these issues.However, there are important deficiencies in this edited volume that cannot be ignored. For one, the quality of the papers is very un- even. Indeed, despite the attempts to articulate some clear notion of Aboriginal philosophy by McPherson and Rabb in their Prolegomena and Tomsons and Mayer in their General Introduction, it's not clear how, for example, Janice Green's What Mauchibinesse Taught Me about Aboriginal Rights can be seen as philosophy. While inclusion of such work is not a serious defect because non-academic contributors will sometimes fail to hit the expected note, it is nevertheless illustrative of a certain immaturity (for lack of a better term) in the subdiscipline of Aboriginal or Native or Indigenous philosophy itself. The same deficiency, for instance, can be observed in Anne Waters's American Indian Thought. Yet it is no aid to the discipline to include as representative cases material that is not clearly philosophical in character. Rabb and McPherson's efforts notwithstanding, treating a descriptive account of one's heritage as phenomenological conflates the distinction between ethnography and philosophy. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,016 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,016 | 0,059 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,015 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».