Revisiting Clifford Scott's "Body Scheme" with a Dash of the Postmodern: A Personal Appreciation Discourse
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
The author has chosen, for a commemoration of Clifford Scott, to review and expand upon one of his principle areas of study: the body scheme. Originating in the neuro-psychoanalytic work of Paul Schilder, Scott's contribution conceptualizes oscillating primordial forces of cosmic bliss and catastrophic chaos that affect the somato-psychic boundaries of persons with severe narcissistic disturbances. The phenomena that Scott described lend themselves less to a stratified vertical classificatory approach than to systems of thought that highlight boundlessness, multiplicity, and less tangible horizontal connections associated with such postmodern thinkers as Deleuze and Guattari. Always the consummate clinician, however, Scott joined his theoretical perspectives with material gleaned from his analytical work with a spectrum of patients and, newly documented in this article, from his knowledge of the work of an important 19th-century figure in Canadian psychiatry. Vignettes of some of the most well-known patients of Scott accompany theory-based elaborations by him and those familiar with his work. The author, who has already written extensively on Scott's work, offers personal comments about the role the eminent Canadian psychoanalyst played in the unfolding of his own professional career.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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