Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: For René Girard, the cause of violence is deeper than the competition and conflict over scarce goods but emerges from the very structure of desire and the social mechanism that has developed to deal with it. The scapegoat mechanism both prevents the violence of the self's desire from destroying the entire community and conceals its own operation from the society that practises it. For this reason, attempts to eliminate or restrain violence that fail to come to terms with this mechanism and the genuine problem it addresses simply institutionalize scapegoating and extend its scope, perpetuating the very violence they seek to end. Girard exposes the workings of the scapegoat mechanism deep within the self in an attempt to overcome the violence that continues to haunt modern politics. I argue that Girard's thought can be complemented by the development of a politics, not in the sense of policy recommendations or institutional analysis, but an account of the practices by which an “interdividual” might overcome the scapegoat mechanism through and in the midst of practices that might stimulate actual political engagement. In this regard, William Cavanaugh's account of an alternative politics to what he calls the “performance” of the modern state is a useful conversation partner for Girard. Cavanaugh develops an account of concrete practices that have the potential to transform desire in ways Girard shows the need for, but never describes in concrete terms. Cavanaugh also embeds this in a particular social context that avoids the abstraction and individualism that a purely theoretical focus may result in.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.101 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| 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".