Development of Personal and Cultural Identities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter is about dualisms: dualisms in general, and, more particularly, about those dichotomies of thought that set selves apart from society, and conceptually isolate individuals from their communities. Because these familiar cleavages between persons and collectives can only be understood in the context of centuries’ worth of commitments to substance dualisms more generally, the chapter begins with an introductory detour through earlier crash‐sites of contested claims about the alleged vices and virtues of dualistic thought more generally. It is obviously not enough, however, to simply document and bemoan the isolationist tactics common to most anthropologies, psychologies, and sociologies, as each (with its own unique and nonoverlapping units of analysis) continues to pass one another like proverbial ships in the night. Rather, it is argued, a promising first step out of this doctrinaire dilemma gets its footing by treading on common concepts that already exist at the margins of those paradigms governing such usual disciplinary divides. The concepts of personal and cultural continuity are offered up as provisional examples of such shared constructs, and are enlisted in the service in a post‐Durkheimian account of differential suicide rates in Indigenous and non‐Indigenous cultures.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".