Book Review - Epistemologies of the South: Justice Against Epistemicide by Boaventura De Sousa Santos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As injustice and discrimination persist across the globe and the socioeconomic gaps of access and privilege continue to widen the binary divide — or what Boaventura de Sousa Santos describes as an abyssal line — between the valued/un(under)valued, recognized/un(under)recognized, the visible/invisible, and the groups and individuals that occupy these sides of the line, Santos outlines the epistemological basis for a decolonial ascendance beyond the line in order to achieve a good life or buen vivir for all. Santos’ richly theoretical contribution and call to action through a postcolonial or decolonial approach and legal pluralistic bend are unmistakable and outline a journey of how, and why, to critically engage and amplify alternate ways of knowing and knowledges sourced from the “un” and “under” valued side of an abyssal line — a rebalancing that transforms hegemonic tools through counterhegemonic uses and salvages knowledges threatened by dilution, loss, and disappearance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".