MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2952647858 · doi:10.1017/9781787444867.024

Joseph D. O'Neil. Figures of Natality: Reading the Political in the Age of Goethe. New York: Bloomsbury, 2017. 312 pp.

2019· book-chapter· en· W2952647858 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Lehleiter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Science and Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)PoliticsArtArt historyHistoryPhilosophyPolitical scienceLinguisticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As many of us would concede and regret, we live in a moment of crisis of the political and in times of incredibly divisive politics. Joseph O'Neil's Figures of Natality: Reading the Political in the Age of Goethe may be motivated by this crisis, but it also shows us, beyond the current moment, that the antagonistic and contingent is at the very heart of the political. Our wish for a “pacified globe” (Carl Schmitt, as quoted by O'Neil, 25) might never be fulfilled, but that could be a good thing. At the core of this project is the question of how political action is possible without relying on essentialism. We do not need to be reminded of current discussions to understand that this is a timely project. O'Neil offers a sophisticated account of the concepts behind these debates which delivers to the reader both a panoramic display of political theory and a careful consideration of literary texts. Drawing on twentieth-century heavyweights on both sides of the political divide, most notably Hannah Arendt and Carl Schmitt, O'Neil sets out to explore and reconceptualize the political in the age of Goethe. The author does not understand his contribution as a genealogy of political concepts from Lessing to Arendt and beyond. His interest is more structural than historical. O'Neil argues that the conceptualization of the political in literary texts around 1800 is characterized by features of contingency and rupture that are captured in metaphors of birth and are best understood using Arendt's concept of natality. The book's premise is that “birth qua natality is the main marker of a discourse of the political in the decades around 1800” (25). Natality, as second birth, overlaps with birth where it promises something absolutely new and it diverges from birth where the latter is bound to causation and determinism. Natality promises both novelty and contingency and is, for Arendt, the precondition for entering the political sphere as an acting being. To put it in Schmittian terms, natality marks the state of exception in which the sovereign acts and “the power of real life breaks through the crust of mechanism that has become torpid by repetition” (Schmitt, as quoted by O'Neil, 21).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.013
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.011

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistory of Science and Medicine→French-language works237,207→