MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991649566 · doi:10.1080/15505170.2012.720236

Love, Hate, and Crystal Meth: Abjection and Teacher Narcissism in Breaking Bad

2012· article· en· W1991649566 on OpenAlexaff
David Lewkowich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Pedagogy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarcissismWishResistance (ecology)PsychologyObject (grammar)Relation (database)SociologySubject (documents)Natural (archaeology)EpistemologySocial psychologyPsychoanalysisAestheticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article the author looks at a particular episode of the television show, Breaking Bad, as a means to explore the pedagogical implications of the Kristevan notion of abjection, and its relation to the emotions of love and hate, and the emergence of teacher narcissism as an inevitable offshoot of the antagonisms in learning. This particular episode revolves around the narcissistic crisis experienced by a teacher who comes to recognize that demarcations of knowledge, pedagogy, subject, and object are inescapably contaminated and shot through with terrifying projections of the abject, in which the self and other necessarily collide. The author argues that it is our resistance, and our failure to communicate with the abject reminders of our own narcissism, that shut down the relational possibilities of teaching, and that compel us to ignore the existence of others. Through recognizing the implications of teacher narcissism, we can thus develop the potential to move beyond projecting our own desires as necessarily natural and inherent, and away from claiming for others the lives we would wish them to lead, rather than those they might wish to lead for themselves.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and PedagogySame topicPhilosophy, Ethics, and ExistentialismFrench-language works237,207