MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308121867 · doi:10.3366/dlgs.2022.0493

Schizoanalysis and Magic

2022· article· en· W4308121867 on OpenAlex
Gary Genosko

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDeleuze and Guattari Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicParanormal Experiences and Beliefs
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimismMAGIC (telescope)Deleuze and GuattariEpistemologyDichotomySubjectivityAestheticsPhilosophySociologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The task of this paper is to gather together Guattari’s scattered references to magic, from Chaosmosis and Schizoanalytic Cartographies, and to reconstitute his position, using animism as a guide. For magic is a bulwark against positioning schizoanalysis as another specialism, and in maintaining what Guattari called its ‘eccentric’ relation to professional psychotherapeutic practices. Magic serves Guattari as an antidote to the scientific schemas that dominate psychoanalysis and psychology. Guattari’s effort to reanimate magic as a viable reference within schizoanalysis flies in the face of the ‘ideal of scientificity’. Whereas animism served Guattari’s decentring of subjectivity from the human individual, and his critique of the prevailing dichotomies of subject/object, human/nature, sign/real, to bring magic into play in schizoanalysis is to open it to ethno-psychiatric investigations of sorcery, as well as neo-pagan ecosophy. Magic is indispensable for understanding contemporary assemblages of enunciation, as it exists concurrently with the very forces that would try to banish it, as well as those which would attempt to exploit it for fascistic purposes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.327 · 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