MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089140226

Dialektik des Dataismus; or, a Critical Examination of the “Dataist” Moment

2020· article· de· W3089140226 on OpenAlexaff
Luc Barter Moulaison

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossings · 2020
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnlightenmentDialecticCritical theoryGermanOrder (exchange)PhilosophyEpistemologySociologyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this essay, I will assess what many have termed the “Dataist” moment. I argue that Dataism, as a social sciences discourse, presents itself as an instantiation of unveiling, or enlightenment, which confronts many of the challenges encountered by previous instances of Enlightenment. I will, in order to present a critique of Dataism, draw upon some of the arguments put forth by the 20th-century German philosophers Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer in their Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947). Finally, I will consider how Adorno and Horkheimer’s framework, as representative of the Frankfurt School of thought, may be a valuable resource for staging a critical confrontation with Dataist dogma.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossingsSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207