Reflexive Mirror: Everything Takes Place As If Threats Were Going Global
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How can social scientists analyse the nexus between globalization and security without reifying global threats? In the aftermath of 9/11, the notion of a so-called globalization of threats has become standard knowledge, especially in the discipline of International Relations (IR). With the recent wave of globalization, so the argument goes, the domain of international security has qualitatively changed to encompass a host of new global threats that could not even be imagined a few decades ago. Many textbooks on world politics present this view as the new deal of the 21st century and invite undergraduate students to build on such a premise to make sense of global security. Disturbingly, however, the argument that threats are going global is also part of contemporary political discourse, most obviously in George W. Bush’s justification for the ‘war on terror’. In other words, the academic discourse on the globalization of threats happens to coincide almost perfectly with the rhetorical strategies of certain politicians. As a result, social scientific knowledge and the legitimacy in which it is wrapped carry important normative consequences for globalization and international security.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".