Bibliographic record
Abstract
In capitalistic society freedom of individuals for making profits and accumulating wealth is understood as a universal truth. Competition among people equipped with this limited notion of freedom is taken as an inevitable prerequisite for achieving prosperity. The current body of scholarship lacks proper explanation of what makes capitalism so hegemonic that it continuously shapes human beliefs and practices. The paper argues that this limited notion of freedom has shaped our imaginary, thoughts and actions. Few people have benefitted but this imaginary has made our societies increasingly unequal and unjust. The paper conceptualises popular education as an alternative approach not only for critiquing the hegemony of capitalism but also for the creation of a more just society. The paper concludes that “popular education” could provide some useful conceptual tools—mainly conscientisation, problem posing method, study circles, and critical pedagogy—as enabling conditions to critically examine some of the hegemonic assumptions of capitalism intractably embedded in our beliefs and thoughts.
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 | 0.030 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.137 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".