MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119934667

Organic Shrapnel and the Possibility of Violence

2013· article· en· W2119934667 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay Anne Balfour

Bibliographic record

VenuePure (Coventry University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHannah Arendt's Political Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubversionRhetoricPoliticsImpulse (physics)SociologyPolitical violenceCriminologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyLawPsychologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his book, 9/11: The Culture of Commemoration, David Simpson<br/>recognizes the political work of violence, suggesting “[w]ar cannot<br/>easily survive the capacity to imagine oneself in the body of the<br/>other.”2 As Simpson infers, the notion of being embedded in the life<br/>of another poses significant challenges to the perpetuation of<br/>violent acts. In this paper, I offer a re-theorization of violence that<br/>takes up the metaphor of “organic shrapnel”, a phenomenon in<br/>which human flesh from a suicide bomber or victim is driven under<br/>the skin of a survivor. What organic shrapnel suggests is not only<br/>that the body is simultaneously permeable and weaponized; the<br/>image also constructs trauma as a relational and possibly ethical<br/>experience. Using the figure of organic shrapnel, I argue for a<br/>broader understanding of the term violence itself – one that<br/>addresses its unfolding in both space and time rather than as an<br/>absolute and single act. Working through several ways of re-theorizing<br/>violence with regard to hospitality, the body, its spatial<br/>and temporal threshold and the significance of the other, the<br/>paper asks: what might it mean to reconsider violence as a site of<br/>potential ethical formation and address rather than the foreclosure<br/>of relational bonds?

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePure (Coventry University)Same topicHannah Arendt's Political PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207