Bibliographic record
Abstract
I turned to the Republic, the Master’s central work, consecrated precisely to the problem of justice, in order to make its contemporary brilliance shine. (Badiou 2012: 10) socrates: At the height of the Cultural Revolution, Mao Zedong launched the directive, “Get involved in politics!” When we obey this directive, we don’t have in mind being treated like employees who demand their salary, nor like thieves who extract secret profits from their engagement. Nor is it a question of running after honors, ambition is not our motivation. In fact, we all think—we, the philosophers of the next generation—that to participate voluntarily in State Power as it currently exists, without being constrained by exceptional circumstances, is totally foreign to our political principles. (Badiou 2012: 67) When people have asked me what I was working on during the course of writing this book and I have responded “the reception of Plato in French feminism,” it has often elicited quizzical looks and puzzled comments. Many act as though I have delved into a specialty so obscure as to defy the capacity of ever finding an audience. And if the question is—how many people in the United States, Canada, or the United Kingdom have read Irigaray, Kristeva, and Kofman closely, while also reading with care the Greek texts of Plato, and the relevant works of Nietzsche, Freud, Heidegger, Sartre, Lévinas, Lacan, Derrida, and Foucault—then, the answer would have to be relatively few. But if comparative obscurity is judged not by the total number of readers who have already followed the same cursus—and if they had, why would this book need to be written?—but instead by the centrality and power of a given constellation of intellectual texts, then I would want to claim that the path traced in the current work is anything but obscure.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.603 | 0.279 |
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".