MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121888341 · doi:10.48487/pdh.2018.n6.22491

Deep Content of the Form: Hayden White on “Freud’s Tropology of Dreaming”

2021· article· en· W3121888341 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy Partner

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)MetaphorDreamAnalogyRepresentation (politics)Content (measure theory)ConsciousnessPsychoanalysisInterpretation (philosophy)PhilosophyIronyEpistemologyLinguisticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hayden White’s only article entirely on Sigmund Freud’s work is on The Interpretation of Dreams, specifically on the dreamwork“operations” by which the mind transforms libidinal impulses into the scenes, sounds, and events the dreamer experiences as the dream. White recognizes in Freud’s interpretive insights a clear analogy with the formal centerpiece of his own work: the major tropes which describe the shape of thought itself. White’s appreciation of how Freud’s revolutionary work on the significance of dreams uncovered the formal linguistic devices exhibited at every level of representation is shared by other major thinkers, two of whom I discuss here: the philosopher Paul Ricoeur and the psychoanalyst Marshall Edelson. They share the comprehension of how psychoanalysis illuminates the deep structure of all cultural artifacts of language as originating from sources deeper than those available to consciousness, and issuing in the formal structures of metaphor, metonymy, synechdoche, and irony.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.247
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207