L’homme augmenté, la biomédecine et la nécessité de (re)penser la vie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’avènement d’une médecine d’amélioration, orientée vers la finalité d’optimiser les performances humaines grâce aux technosciences, et le développement d’un imaginaire du « posthumain » porté par les militants du mouvement transhumaniste, questionnent plus que jamais les frontières entre l’humain, la société et le monde du vivant. Cet article vise à montrer que c’est l’objet et l’identité même de la sociologie qui sont directement concernés et interpellés par l’aspiration grandissante à améliorer l’humain. Ce nouveau continent biomédical et biopolitique accule en effet plus que jamais la sociologie à penser la vie en soi. La nécessité de poser les bases d’une sociopolitique de la vie et de ce que l’on pourrait appeler des humanités écologiques se révèle cruciale si l’on veut aborder de manière critique, non seulement l’homme augmenté, mais l’exploitation biocapitaliste des corps et de la vie qu’il recouvre plus fondamentalement.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".