Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neste artigo, o autor discute as bases epistemológicas bachelardianas das obras de Bourdieu e Foucault tendo em vista avaliar-lhes a pertinência para uma sociologia da Modernidade na periferia. O que Bachelard fundou foi uma modalidade de reconstrução racional associada a uma historização que se contrapõe ao positivismo na medida em que enfatiza o caráter criativo e inventivo da fenomenotécnica científica. Bourdieu assume de Bachelard a injunção à ruptura epistemológica entre o fenômeno que se reconstitui na ciência e aquele que se apresenta ao senso comum. Foucault usa o modo de demonstração bachelardiano das raízes fantásticas das ciências para desmantelar as pretensões das ciências humanas. Sugere-se, neste artigo, que a extensão da posição epistemológica foucaultiana é heuristicamente mais fecunda e permanece promissora para os lugares de enunciação com pretensão de desvelamento do modo como a Modernidade apresenta-se na periferia.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".