MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894553230 · doi:10.5325/jspecphil.32.3.0331

SPEP Co-Director's Address: Hesitation as Philosophical Method—Travel Bans, Colonial Durations, and the Affective Weight of the Past

2018· article· en· W2894553230 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alia Al‐Saji

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Speculative Philosophy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropological Studies and Insights
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismNationalityPhenomenology (philosophy)SociologyStructuringAestheticsHistoryImmigrationLawPolitical scienceEpistemologyArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The 2017 “travel bans”—curtailing travel into the United States for nationals of several Muslim-majority countries—make palpable the skewed possibility of movement that comes with belonging to a nationality or passport. My experience of navigating travel as an Iraqi-Canadian gives rise to a critical phenomenological reflection on the affective weight of colonial pasts. The colonial past remains with the present; it is intensified through repeated enactment in U.S. policy but also through the weight of its duration and indifference toward it. It is differentially remembered, cognized, and felt—disregarded from white and U.S.-centric perspectives, yet palpably structuring the everyday for the occupied, racialized, and “formerly colonized.” Sometimes it is felt in the form of hesitation. I ask how hesitation can become critical and what its role might be in redressing the past. My theory of time—Bergsonian yet moving beyond Bergson—helps me think this question. I argue that the past coexists with the present and is reconfigured along with it, in a process I liken to kneading or folding dough. While the past's colonizing fractures cannot be healed, they can be felt, made perceptible, and thought—in attentive reconfiguration of the past, worked through in a critical phenomenology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.320 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations44
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Speculative PhilosophySame topicAnthropological Studies and InsightsFrench-language works237,207