MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130270912 · doi:10.7202/1075130ar

Une bonne mort ? (Blanchot, Derrida)

2021· article· fr· W3130270912 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cosmin Toma

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophy and Social Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyAllusionLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Séminaire La peine de mort de Jacques Derrida est hanté, depuis ses marges, par la question de l’euthanasie. Si Derrida y fait allusion à plusieurs reprises au fil des séances, il ne la laisse pas moins en suspens, nous indiquant par là qu’il s’agit d’une problématique à part entière. Or dans « Survivre », texte de 1979 sur L’Arrêt de mort de Maurice Blanchot, Derrida évoquait déjà le « double bind qui fait de toute mort un crime », déjouant ainsi cette distinction, censée garantir la frontière éthique entre l’euthanasie et la peine capitale. À travers une relecture de L’Arrêt de mort qui prend appui sur le Séminaire La peine de mort , cet article analyse la porosité des différentes déclinaisons de la mort lorsqu’elle est pensée comme crime, à commencer par l’arrêt, la peine et la sentence (ou « death sentence »).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 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 venuePhilosophiquesSame topicPhilosophy and Social TheoryFrench-language works237,207