Rightlessness In An Age Of Rights: Hannah Arendt And The Contemporary Struggles Of Migrants (Book Review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ayten Gündoğdu's book addresses two highly-topical, complex and contested fields of study: human rights and migration.These fields intersect with other problematic areas and struggles, for example between universality and national sovereignty.Gündoğdu's angle of vision lends the work particular interest, as she analyses the problems of statelessness through the lens of Hannah Arendt's political theory and Arendt's conception of human being.Although Arendt is a familiar figure in discussions of statelessness, Gündoğdu's approach is to read Arendt both with and against the grain to rethink some of the dilemmas of human rights.She treats Arendt's work as a living document, reinterpreting and reapplying it by bringing it into dialogue with work by other scholars as well as historical and recent events (but not including the current refugee settlement calamities in the Mediterranean, European Union and elsewhere).Gündoğdu engages with the work of Arendt to analyse and go beyond "the perplexing persistence of rightlessness in an age of rights" (Gündoğdu, 2015, p. 11, emphasis in original).She treats these perplexities as genuine dilemmas, not aberrations or symptoms of bad faith: for example, the dilemma inherent in universal declarations of human rights is that these rights rely on nation states for implementation.Human rights become frustrated because they are unenforceable.Gündoğdu's aporetic, Socratic, approach
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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; 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".