Bibliographic record
Abstract
One result of late capitalist expansion is the socio-cultural resistance of Indigenous peoples around the world against theforces of cultural uniformityand theappropriation of Indigenous peoplessovereigntyby the modern state(Niezen 2003, 2). These grievances, with their basic assumptions, are -I argue -encapsulated in Jurgen Habermas’conceptualization of thecolonization of the lifeworld.While the social ontology of his theory is primarily concerned with the constitution of late 20 th century society, it also provides a repository to investigate the struggle against the colonization of lifeworld(s) under which Indigenous communities within states presently find themselves subsumed. Consequently, I depart from his rather Eurocentric discussion ofarchaic tribal that, as he argues,more or less approximate an ideal typicalhomogenous lifeworld. Instead, Iaim to illustrate how Indigenous societies struggle for their distinct identity as it is affected by the pathologies following from the colonization of their particular lifeworld(s) today. Accordingly, I do not treat Indigenous groups as bygone ideal types, nor as closed social systems in which thekinship calculus serves as abasic boundary setting mechanism (Habermas 1989, 193).On the contrary, I view them as resisting collectivities and uncomfortable elements of the modern state that are often in the way of a market economy in search for (and dependent on) anever-ending resource supply (Mander and Tauli-Corpuz 2006, 3).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".