Génesis, postulados y críticas a la inflexión decolonial. Conversación con Eduardo Restrepo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El presente texto recupera el diálogo -vía Skype- sostenido por el antropólogo colombiano Eduardo Restrepo5 con el Grupo de Trabajo sobre Pensamiento Decolonial de la Universidad de Concordia (Montreal, Quebec, Canadá), el 25 de noviembre de 20146, organizada por Yuri Moreno. Al inicio de la charla se menciona que el objetivo es contextualizar y pensar el proyecto modernidad-colonialidad y la inflexión decolonial desde la perspectiva de Restrepo. Para ello, la primera pregunta alude a cómo es que Eduardo se incorpora al grupo modernidad-decolonialidad, ante lo que no deja claro incluso si es que alguna vez se incorporó, ya siempre se referirá al grupo como “ellos”, aunque sí señala que su acercamiento se remite al tiempo en que estudiaba su doctorado en la Universidad de Carolina del Norte (en Chapel Hill), y en el marco de los contactos entreWalter Mignolo (Chapel Hill) y Arturo Escobar (Duke). Rememora su participación en una reunión realizada en 2001, que era la 3° o 4° de este tipo, en donde confluyeron, entre otros, Aníbal Quijano, Walter Mignolo, Catherine Walsh, Zulma Palermo, Javier Sanjinés, Santiago Castro-Gómez y dos integrantes del Instituto Pensar.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".