L'Un, le Multiple et le Complexe. L'Université et la transdisciplinarité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Cet article analyse, dans une perspective historique et philosophique, les appels actuels pour une conversion des universités à la transdisciplinarité. Il s’attache d’abord à clarifier le contexte dans lequel est apparue la notion de transdisciplinarité pour montrer comment ces appels s’inscrivent dans la continuité des débats autour de l’unification et la spécialisation de la connaissance (l’Un et le Multiple) qui, depuis l’Antiquité, scandent l’histoire de l’institution universitaire. Il montre ensuite comment l’avènement du capitalisme postmoderne et les mutations culturelles et idéologiques consécutives aux mobilisations des années 1960 et 1970 ont paradoxalement favorisé l’émergence de la revendication d’une université transdisciplinaire promue tant par les partisans du capitalisme que par des représentants de l’altermondialisme. Il conclut que les universités ont aujourd’hui un rôle clé à jouer dans cette confrontation entre les définitions utilitaristes et utopiques de la transdisciplinarité.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".