MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479858570 · doi:10.1057/9780230248519_13

Sartre in the Company of Merleau-Ponty, Foucault and Duden

2010· book-chapter· en· W2479858570 on OpenAlexaff
Monika M. Langer

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFoucault, Power, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlienationMind–body problemEpistemologyPoliticsPhilosophySociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter I argue that there is an intrinsic connection between the kind of world in which we find ourselves today — a world in environmental crisis — and the kind of body we have created for ourselves. If we are to bring about a positive change in our environmental situation, we must significantly transform our bodily being at the same time. I will contend that Sartre’s phenomenological description better fits our current experience of our body and the world than does Merleau-Ponty’s. Further, I will argue that Sartre’s analyses of the look and the practico-inert can help us understand where we are environmentally today. These analyses also illuminate our alienation from the body and world that may well play a major role in environmental destruction and political conflict. This chapter shows that Foucault’s and Duden’s critiques of the modern body draw on Sartre’s analysis of the look. Further, I demonstrate that combining aspects of Sartre’s philosophy with Merleau-Ponty’s, Foucault’s and Duden’s perspectives yields a fruitful approach to current concerns. 1 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.022
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicFoucault, Power, and EthicsFrench-language works237,207