Unpacking the Mind of Evil: A Sociological Perspective on the Role of Intent and Motivations in Genocide
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For quite some time, theories on the role of intent in genocide were conceptually frozen in polarised liberal and post-liberal, or purpose- and knowledge-based approaches, respectively. In accordance with recent criminological thought that moves beyond the narrow debate, this article develops a new sociological perspective on the role of intent in genocide. Drawing on frame analysis it is argued that intent is mainly relevant for framing genocidal action at the macro level. However, individual low-level perpetrators act from a large number of different motivations, of which ideologies of intent are only one. Others range from obedience to authority, coercion and group pressures to sadism, opportunism or the allure of status and power. Further, rethinking genocide with social movement theory helps to combine purpose- and knowledge-based approaches without abandoning a distinct concept of genocide.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it