Social Attractors: A Proposal to Enhance “Resilience Thinking” about the Social
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes social attractors as a way of addressing limitations in the functionalist sociology commonly applied to the social when examining ecological-social relations. It focuses on “resilience thinking” to argue the case. Resilience thinking is discussed (1) as an analytical strategy whereby ecological and social attractors perform analogous roles in a coordinated approach to ecosystems and social relations, and (2) as a social movement within the “new ecology” that institutionalized around the notion of resilence. The article begins by describing the institutionalization of resilience thinking. It then argues that functionalist assumptions about equilibrium contradict those of resilience thinking and lead to conflated views of social relations. The theoretical context of the social attractor, which stems from a synthesis of critical realism and Gramscian analysis of power, is outlined. Finally, the qualitative, nonlinear methodology that the social attractor facilitates is illustrated through a hypothetical example involving ecosocial relations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it