Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose une réflexion sur le rapport entre pensée politique et théorie psychanalytique dans l’oeuvre de Claude Lefort, notamment à partir d’une analyse de la notion de « division originaire » du social. L’importance conférée par Lefort à la notion de conflit dans sa reconceptualisation du fait démocratique est le plus souvent rattachée à sa relecture de Machiavel : pour comprendre la place et le rôle fondamental du conflit politique, il faut en quelque sorte jouer Machiavel contre Marx. Or, si le terme de conflit est bien présent dans son oeuvre comme synonyme de désaccord, d’opposition, et même comme conflit de classes, le terme est recouvert par celui de division dont Lefort précise qu’elle est originaire. Et s’il fallait, pour cerner les enjeux de cette thèse, se tourner vers Lacan plutôt que vers Machiavel ? Bien que Lefort n’approfondisse nulle part clairement la référence à la psychanalyse, l’empreinte de certains concepts (symbolique, Loi, désir) est, dans son oeuvre, presque partout palpable, et nous croyons utile d’opérer, voire de reconstruire certains rapprochements.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".