(Dis)locating Gender Within the Universal: Teaching PhilosophyThrough Narrative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Philosophy and its OtherThis paper is about the opposition between narrative and philosophy, two distinct discursive practices that have historically been defined as being at odds with one another since the inception of Greek philosophy as rational discourse.Within our own narrative of the history of Western philosophy, we trace this opposition back to the pre-Socratic celebration of reason over myth, at which point, according to this account, primitive or naive narrative explanations of phenomena were supplanted by the dialectic of reason."Man" began to ask the abstract "what is ..." question in lieu of the previous narrative "who is..." question.Socrates became the namesake for this philosophical tradition and banished the epic poets from the Republic because they failed to embrace the ideal of reason.Stories, Plato argued, threatened rational discourse because they were grounded in the mess of the particular, whereas philosophy aspired to generality and universal truths.Narrative was seen as limited by its univocal aspect, its need for a telling and a listening.It was temporally located in the present, with emphasis on distinct personal incidents of the past, and was therefore caught up in unique life histories, all too particular for those needing the certainty of a universal truth.Derrida (1993) argues that philosophy needs to define itself against this other-narrative-so as to affirm its own centrality and necessity.Philosophical discourse, according to Derrida, is dependent on this other dis-
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".