Quand compatir tient lieu de faire. Les paradoxes sociologiques de la compassion1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif de cette contribution portant sur la compassion est d’examiner ce que cette notion veut dire d’un point de vue sociologique, ce qu’elle nous apprend et permet de comprendre de l’activité sociale. Cet article vise en ce sens à identifier les vertus sociologiques de la compassion, en dégageant ce qu’elle recouvre et ce à quoi elle engage à la lumière de deux variables : d’une part, sa qualité de relation sociale et, d’autre part, son rapport à l’action. Il en ressort une idée-force : la compassion est avant tout une relation sociale, mais a) une relation sociale paradoxale qui égalise sur la base d’une différence maintenue, b) une relation sociale marquée du sceau de l’impuissance en même temps qu’appelant une action et c) une relation momentanée de reconnaissance d’autrui. Ce texte se conclut par l’énoncé de quelques idées explicatives de l’origine de l’impuissance au coeur de la compassion.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".