MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025703718 · doi:10.1068/d4908

Cohabitating in the Globalised World: Peter Sloterdijk's Global Foams and Bruno Latour's Cosmopolitics

2009· article· en· W2025703718 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Ève Morin

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning D Society and Space · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Cultural Memory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)MetaphorEpistemologyContext (archaeology)ConstructivePoliticsOntologySociologyGlobalizationTrilogyPolitical actionPolitical philosophySpace (punctuation)Critical theoryPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper seeks to present a comprehensive and systematic picture of Peter Sloterdijk's ambitious and provocative theory of globalisation. In the Sphären (Spheres) trilogy, Sloterdijk provides both a spatialised ontology of human existence and a historical thesis concerning the radical shifts in human conceptions of the space or sphere they inhabit. Essentially, Sloterdijk argues that global interconnectedness and increasing population and communication density have brought about a situation in which every human action is limited and inhibited by the proximity of others—a situation he describes using the metaphor of foam. In this context, are not all possibilities for constructive political action stifled from the very outset? I will argue that Bruno Latour's concept of cosmopolitics furnishes us with resources to respond to this collapse of political space.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.038
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning D Society and SpaceSame topicLiterature and Cultural MemoryFrench-language works237,207