ENGINEERING, PATRIARCHY, AND THE PLURIVERSE: WHAT WORLD OF MANY WORLDS DO WE DESIGN? WHAT WORLDS DO WE TEACH?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a brief review of sustainability definitions and analyzes ways of designingtaught in our Engineering education system, specifically acknowledging the capitalist, patriarchal, colonial, Western world that much, if not most, of current Engineering practice situates itself within. Included in these frameworks are pluriversal design, co-design, participatory design, and discursive design. Another important topic that will be examined is the dualist perspective embodied in Engineering practice that creates a distinction between “man” and “nature”. While this problem is inherently systemic, our intention is to provide a partial record of our own critical selfreflection,contextualized using critical theory. It is intended as a starting place for settler-descendent NorthAmerican educators to begin to contextualize our own approaches, not as a way for us to guide steps forward, but instead to begin a self-critique of current approaches that need continued work.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it