Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oscillations have been famously treated by anthropologists at the level of social structure. Rites of passage: dynamic equilibrium: binary exchange. Employing a Nietzschean trope of the Apollonian and Dionysian, this article treats oscillations more existentially. Between cultural belonging and truth, between symbolic form and experience, between poetry and biology—the article disinters certain motilities of being and becoming that exemplify universals of human capacity and can be claimed to be ubiquitous in human experience. Tensions are intrinsic to the human condition, the article argues, and knowledge of the human is also to be foundbetween:between the orderly and formal on the one hand, and the gratuitous, random and free on the other. For instance, in an oscillation between cultural belonging and scientific truth, Ernest Gellner acceded to knowledge of a possibly universal, rational morality. Oscillating between the psychically intensive methodology and the extensive, George Devereux advocated knowledge of the potentialities of the human psyche as such. Oscillating between ideal‐typical, conceptual and symbolic schemata and the motile sensorium, between the biochemical conditioning of individual embodiment and the creative imagination, Edmund Leach and James Fernandez claimed knowledge of the connection between culture and society and bodily experience. Embracing oscillation one may approach an appropriately flexible and transitory knowledge of humankind, accepting the irony that it is ‘forms of movement’ that best give onto an appreciation of the human condition.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".