MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1567593807 · doi:10.1080/1600910x.2006.9672922

SEDUCTION, ALIENATION, RACKETEERING

2006· article· en· W1567593807 on OpenAlexaff
Volker M. Heins

Bibliographic record

VenueDistinktion Journal of Social Theory · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Theory and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlienationPoliticsPower (physics)State (computer science)Transformative learningSociologyCriminologySovereigntyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to explicate concepts of politics that were introduced—if somewhat implicitly—by different Frankfurt School theorists. Authors writing within this influential tradition have identified a number of structural threats to the very possibility of genuine, transformative political action in modern capitalist society. The article discusses these threats under three headings: seduction by media and consumerism, the draining away of political power from the state in favor of rackets, and political alienation afflicting individuals and communities excluded from circles of power. These three concepts can be read as transmutations of classical political ideas. Seduction subverts liberal ideas of ‘freedom’, racketeering is a degenerate way of forming ‘associations’, and political alienation is a caricature of die contractualist notion of surrendering power to the sovereign state. In conclusion, an attempt is made to evaluate the extent to which those concepts may or may not help us to better understand the place and function of the political in modern societies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.076
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDistinktion Journal of Social TheorySame topicCritical Theory and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207