Parole de tête, parole de coeur. L’a-humain, l’immonde et l’humabestial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Préoccupé par les questions de l’identité et de la subjectivité, le xxe siècle a élu deux grandes figures symboliques pour permettre à l’homme de se dire et de se définir : d’un côté, l’a-humain, de l’autre, l’abject (Julia Kristeva) et l’immonde (Jean Clair). Aujourd’hui, ces figures ne suffisent plus. À l’heure de la surexposition de l’individu au détriment de la collectivité, du zapping comme relation privilégiée au monde et d’une violence symbolique de plus en plus crue, une nouvelle figure prend de l’envergure pour interroger notre humanité : « l’humabestial », qui fonctionne sur le principe de l’alternatif. Comment cette nouvelle déclinaison, prise dans les rets du mythique et adaptée à nos sociétés occidentales, peut-elle s’imposer ? Par persuasion (parole de tête), ou par empathie (parole de coeur) ? À nous d’en mesurer l’étendue, les enjeux, les implications ontologiques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".