Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to show that one cannot reach an opening to new forms of political rationality from the manner in which Foucault thinks the subject in liberal modernity. The difference between "concurrence" understood as form or as norm distinguishes Foucault's diagnosis regarding liberal modernity from the diagnosis presented by Dardot and Laval. This difference lies at the basis of the possibility of thinking with Dardot and Laval a counter-rationality or, with Foucault, of remaining within the epistemological framework of liberalism itself. This is because the status of this (neo)liberal rationality, in Foucault's analysis, has as its counterpart the (neo)liberal subject. Therefore, to indicate the theoretical and political limitation that rationality as an essential form of modernity implies to Foucault's thought, I will rely on some critical considerations to the analysis of Dardot and Laval, opposite in this point to Foucault's reading of modern rationality and of the (neo)liberal subject.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| 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".