Enchanted Modernism: “Magical Thinking: a Symposium,” University of London, May 11-12, 2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“I see dead people … They don’t know they’re dead!” So run the famous lines from M. Night Shyamalan’s film The Sixth Sense (1999). These fearful words, addressed by a clairvoyant boy to the child psychologist examining his “hallucinations,” herald a now-famous twist towards the end of the film in which the psychologist is himself revealed to be dead, a revenant in fact, although he did not know it. For researchers and commentators in a wide variety of disciplines and cultural arenas it has become known that the great “twist” in life, as in death, is that between knowledge and belief, between evidence and faith, there exists a chasm within which deeply-rooted human behaviours, such as ghost-seeing, percolate and can come to dominate our experience of the world. The foreknowledge of our own personal death, and its consequent denial and obfuscation in everyday thought-processes has become a standard reference-point in debates focusing upon the concept of magical thinking. This concept, equally at home in the disciplines of social anthropology, psychoanalysis, and literary theory, refers to the range of strategies, behaviours, and cultural interventions which format the interface between thought and the other, desire and fulfilment, and cause and effect.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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".