Des épistémologies des Suds pour penser une éducation relative aux changements climatiques à portée transformatoire.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pour réussir à relever les nombreux défis posés par les changements climatiques, l’humanité a besoin d’élargir le champ des possibles et d’entreprendre une profonde transformation sociale et politique en vue de l’atteinte d’une plus grande justice sociale et environnementale. Pour le sociologue et épistémologue Boaventura de Sousa Santos (2016), la justice mondiale ne pourra pas être atteinte sans la poursuite d’une justice cognitive mondiale. Cette dernière doit reconnaitre l’incomplétude de la rationalité moderne occidentale. Cet article effectue un retour sur l’œuvre Épistémologies du Sud (Boaventura De Sousa Santos, 2016) en tentant de mettre en exergue les principaux concepts développés par l’auteur et qui semblent porteurs pour penser une éducation relative aux changements climatiques (ERCC) transformatoire, axée sur la justice écosociale et ouverte à des subjectivités et des expérimentations alternatives.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".