MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2484627719 · doi:10.1017/ccol9780521860543.011

Rhetoric of the Athenian citizen

2009· book-chapter· en· W2484627719 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria Wohl

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorRhetoricMetonymySociologyLinguisticsLiteratureEpistemologyAestheticsPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synonymy, metonymy, metaphor are not forms of thought that add a second sense to a primary, constitutive literality of social relations; instead, they are part of the primary terrain itself in whcih the social is constituted. (Laclau and Mouffe 1985:110) Rhetoric fueled Athenian democracy. Public policy was forged through persuasive speeches, and political power was the prize of oratorical skill. Citizenship, too, was defined by speech, the citizen’s right to speak his mind freely in the Assembly. But rhetoric also structured the democracy and the democratic citizen in more profound ways. If, as Jacques Lacan says, the unconscious is structured like a language, so too is the political unconscious, ideology. The ways in which citizens talk about themselves and their relationship to the city - the language they use but also the very grammar of their thought – is a vital part of that ideology. The rhetoric of the polites (citizen) bespeaks the fundamental structure, the constitutive tensions and aspirations, of the politeia (state). In Athens the citizen was defined by rhetoric in a very literal sense. One of the key identifying attributes of a citizen was parrhēsia , the right to speak freely in the public sphere. This included the right of any citizen to stand up in the Assembly and argue for or against specific proposals, a freedom dramatized in Aristophanes’ Acharnians , where the everyman hero Dikaiopolis (“Just City”) attempts to convince his angry countrymen to make peace with Sparta. Frank speech, Aristophanes suggests, is not only the citizen’s right but his duty, his contribution to civic justice.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207