MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210540856 · doi:10.1353/esp.2021.0055

Comprendre la condition handicapée: Réalité et dépassement by Henri-Jacques Stiker

2021· article· fr· W4210540856 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sally M. Kessler

Bibliographic record

Venue˜L'œesprit créateur/˜L'œEsprit créateur · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalysisIdentity (music)NarrativeSociologyExistentialismConversationPsychologyAestheticsEpistemologyPhilosophyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Comprendre la condition handicapée: Réalité et dépassement by Henri-Jacques Stiker Sally M. Kessler Henri-Jacques Stiker. Comprendre la condition handicapée: Réalité et dépassement. Toulouse: Érès, 2021. Pp. 128. 16 €. Expanding on his La condition handicapée (2017), as well as numerous other publications, Henri-Jacques Stiker clarifies disability as a condition in existentialist terms and locates its significance in current social justice concerns. Drawing extensively on personal narratives and methodologies from philosophy, psychoanalysis, history, sociology, and anthropology, Stiker meticulously defines and evaluates the stakes of this conversation. Stiker qualifies the disabled condition as a stigmatized experience that is the Other to 'normal' embodiment but shared among diverse groups of individuals. In Chapter One, Stiker relies on Pap Ndiaye's studies of black identities to define disability as a prescribed identity that may become self-appropriated. The firsthand narratives he employs in Chapters Two and Three describe the importance of the disabling event that fractures disabled lived experience. In Chapter 4, he concludes that this simultaneous remembered past, current struggle, and imagined future is experienced as a haunted life, a palimpsest. In Chapter 5, Stiker recounts the history of the gradually expanding legal definitions of "handicapé," a term with which he and his sources struggle. He considers various terms for "disabled," landing ultimately on the Québécois term, "personnes avec des incapacités," which implies other capacities. In Chapter 6, he affirms that a cultural shift needs to be made to focus on individuals' capabilities. Despite its current stigmatized status, Stiker notes that people living with la condition handicapée overwhelmingly reject pity, categorization, commodification or a socially prescribed identity. In Chapter 7, he instead explores the value of knowledge production based on the narratives of disabled people or their loved ones. As a methodology, critical disability studies can be a useful lens for any scholar, disabled or not, with an inclusive "attitude d'esprit" (78). Nonetheless, the disabled condition is marginalized, requiring a movement towards social inclusion that Stiker asks in Chapter 8 his readers to begin immediately. He argues that it is a grave injustice that disabled people are effectively denied full citizenship and participation in society. All members of society must be recognized as unique and equal, with identities that cannot be broken down into bodies, minds or other fragmented pieces. What Stiker is calling for is thus nothing less than a paradigm shift, philosophically and socially, in mainstream conceptions of humanity and justice. His call for this "Quiet Revolution" seems especially significant in the context of COVID-19, due to the virus's heightened threat to some disabled individuals and many individuals' deepened understanding of isolation and lack of economic productivity. At stake is not only the integration of marginalized members of society but the recognition of everyone's individual humanity, outside of their seeming productive value. Stiker's short work approaches the borderline between activism and scholarship. Given the evident urgency of addressing social injustice, his work will interest scholars interested in questions of identity, social justice, and the interdisciplinarity of critical disability studies. Sally M. Kessler University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Copyright © 2021 L'Esprit Créateur

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜L'œesprit créateur/˜L'œEsprit créateurSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207