Effets de sphères. L'histoire des architectures politiques chez Peter Sloterdijk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé. Cet article prend pour matériau le dernier cycle de l'œuvre de Peter Sloterdijk, lequel s'est attelé au développement d'une analyse phénoménologique de la spatialité humaine. L'optique de notre contribution consiste à faire état de cette théorisation spatiale à l'égard des constructions politiques. Cette entreprise se présente comme une vaste histoire des traces cosmologiques et architecturales des lieux de production de l'humanité et elle vise une réappropriation de la réflexion anthropologique sur le topos de l'humanité qui a été longtemps subsumé par la métaphysique de l'au-delà et qui est aujourd'hui désagrégé par les processus de mobilisation totale du capital. Abstract. This paper proposes an account of the recent works of Peter Sloterdijk, an author that has developed a phenomenological analysis of human spaces. The aim of my contribution is to put this spatial theorization in relation with political constructions. Sloterdijk's enterprise presents itself as a long history of the cosmological and architectural elements that shape the very spaces of human-production. It is also described as a new path for the understanding of the human topos that has been for too long subsumed by metaphysics of the ‘beyond’ and liquefied nowadays by contemporary mobilization processes of the capital.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".