Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a brief account of some key aspects of Foucault's later work in the area of power, security, population and `governmentality', and a critical analysis of these in light of other of his writings. The argument is as follows. This later work is marred by an implicit idealism that takes two forms. First, there is a vulgar historicist logic, a neo-Hegelian objective idealism involving a unilinear theory of crucial aspects of western history and the use of a single measuring rod for comparing and contrasting successive forms of organization of societies, thereby pre-empting the possibility of examining the varying effects in different social contexts of seemingly similar ways of organizing social relations. Second, much of this work is overly intentionalist in its understanding of particular phenomena. This subjective idealism involves an explanation of social arrangements as the result of political activities which, in turn, are themselves understood through the extant writings of various governors, policy writers and advisors—namely, as the effect of self-consciously produced self-reflexive discourses. Some of his earlier work, notably The Archaeology of Knowledge, provides the conceptual resources to critique and go beyond these writings.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.055 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".