Talking heads and shitting in the street: Stuttering Parrhesia in three modes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper seeks both to expand the range of what counts as political action for dysfluent voices and to find resources that can generate critical breaks within neo-liberal modes of power. With the Cynics, I suggest that some truths – like dysfluent lives are worth living – cannot be told by a talking head. I accordingly map three possible modes of truth-telling within the lexicon of parrhesia: therapeutic, Platonic and Cynic. Therapeutic truth-telling is an apolitical enunciation that indexes a model of authenticity and is limited to speaking truth about oneself and the world in a normalizing register. Platonic parrhesia is a form of equality-based political discourse that aims at inclusion. In this mode, the parrhesiastes, like the talking head, must fashion their body as a pure vessel of truth to be recognized as such. Cynic truth-telling, finally, is a radical embodiment of critique that seeks rupture rather than understanding. Taking up the motto of the Cynics – ‘deface the currency’ – perhaps dysfluent voices can find resources to ‘de-face’ speech and its mythic power that has become entwined with capital.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".