Transformations and Metamorphoses. Writing and ‘Thinkability’ between Kafka and Freud
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A travers l’etude des ecrits de Kafka et de Freud, le texte analyse comment on peut affronter de differentes facons, la fragilite du corporel. La decouverte d’une grave maladie, en meme temps que la revelation de conflits oedipiens irresolus ont conduit Kafka a exprimer une nette derive vers la culpabilite et la mort dans ses œuvres. Chez l’auteur de la Metamorphose, domine l’idee d’une mutation immediate, totale et sans liens avec le passe. Pour lui, l’ecriture n’est pas un instrument, ni de reparation ni de rachat, elle n’est pas une trace pour les autres. Le langage n’a pas une fonction communicative, il opere comme une action directe (Bleger). Il affronte la maladie en ecrivant ce qu’il s’interdit de penser, il est alors l’insecte horrible et disparait. Tandis que Freud maitrise les angoisses liees a la Premiere Guerre Mondiale et ceci, a travers l’elaboration douloureuse des ecrits de ces annees-la. Dans la mythologie, Zeus est capable de transformations de la pensee, par contre Metis, l’astuce, domine la Metamorphose. Metis succombe face a l’utilisation intelligente de la pensee initiee par Zeus. Mais, peut-on penser, encore aujourd’hui, que la lutte entre les deux mene au meme resultat.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".