MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742965515 · doi:10.1111/nup.12186

Profits and prophets: Derrida on linguistic bereavement and (Im)possibility in nursing

2017· article· en· W2742965515 on OpenAlexafffund
Barbara Pesut

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Philosophy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsLinguisticsPsychologyNursingPhilosophyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work of Jacques Derrida has received relatively little attention within nursing philosophy. Perhaps this is because Derrida is known best for deconstructing philosophy itself, a task he performed by making language unintelligible to make a point. This in itself makes his work daunting for nurses who do applied philosophy. Despite these difficulties, Derrida's focus on holding open a space for ideas, particularly those ideas that are invisible or unpopular, holds potential for enhancing the diversity of ideas within nursing. His work, liberally scattered with religious references, and focused on deconstructing language that served the profits of a few, earned him the characterization of a prophet without religion. This idea was further supported in the way his deconstruction attempted to keep spaces open for the un-representable and its generativity in opening new possibilities in life. A deconstruction for generative purposes is particularly helpful within palliative care where language quickly takes on dogma in the face of mystery and where new possibilities support life amidst the irrevocable nature of death. In this article, I discuss Derrida's deconstructive approach of differance and then apply that approach to language common in palliative care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing PhilosophySame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207