Bibliographic record
Abstract
Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1990, Charles Taylor argues that a person suffering from the lack of adequate recognition is an evil that can be ranked in the same echelons of harm as inequality, exploitation, and injustice. 1This is so, Taylor argues, because people's identities are established as a function of what can be negotiated in the public sphere.Thus, misrepresentation, or lack of representation, can produce distorted and negative identities that can result in extreme psychological suffering and faulty life plans-something feminists, and others, have been arguing for decades. 2 It is for that reason, that Taylor argues that due recognition "is not just a courtesy we owe people.It is a vital human need." 3Having thus made the case that non-recognition or misrecognition, "can be a form of oppression, imprisoning someone is a false, distorted, and reduced mode of being," 4 Taylor goes on to briefly review the potential clash that this "self fact" sets up between "the politics of equal dignity" (which is based on the idea that all humans are equally worthy of respect, regardless of gender, skin colour, sexual orientation, etc.) and the "politics of difference" which objects to the difference-blind fashion 5 that the former advocates, and argues instead that "we have to recognize and even foster particularity." 6This, in turn, leads to the notion that, since an individual's identity may be tied to her culture, cultures (rather than mere individuals) have legitimate claims to recognition.Taylor cites, as an example, the French-Canadian bid for recognition as a "distinct society" which has clashed with the "difference-blind" Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.Taylor also analyzes how the dynamics of self-recognition makes a serious claim on what counts as adequate educational material.That is, if the struggle for freedom and equality must pass through individual identity-formation, it seems to follow that concerted efforts ought to be made to include, for example, Afrocentric texts in mainly black schools 7 and authors other than dead white males in university humanities departments.Taylor, and others, goes to considerable length in analyzing the latter issue, i.e., the degree to which the established canon must be modified so as to accede to the demands of multiculturalists.1 Taylor 1994, p. 64. 2 Thus, Taylor says that people can suffer real damage "if the people or society around them mirror back to them a confining or contemptible picture of themselves."
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".