Poetic Inquiry as Minor Research: A New Direction in Humanities' Methodologies of Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces poetic inquiry as minor research and positions poetic inquiry not in opposition to major forms of research in the social sciences and humanities but as transforming and deterritorializing in relationship (Deleuze and Guattari, 1986, 1987). Where, unlike discursive-narrative forms of research, poetic inquiry is not defined by the hegemonic power (pouvoir) of constraints of description, argument, analyses and interpretation, as an onto-epistemological activity, but by the contagious power (puissance) of the variations of responsiveness as an ethical act or performance (Deleuze and Guattari). Stretching tensors all throughout, in ever-new direction of continuous variation, the inquiry makes the research itself stammer, introducing a line of departure or flight to dominant territories of epistemology or assemblages of a thousand plateaus of narrative-discourse. In this way, poetic inquiry transforms the inquiry itself into something else: it is the possibility of an event of responsiveness. Poetic inquiry as a research methodology introduces the emergence of a system of openness (Massumi,2002) and creative contagion within a research genre that may perform nothing more than the act of ethically responding to the call of an other.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".