Par-delà humain et non-humain : de la nécessité d’une approche matérialiste du vivant en sciences sociales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
S’inscrivant dans la continuité de la remise en cause des dualismes modernes sujet/objet et nature/artifice, cet article présente une critique du concept de non-humain généralement utilisé pour désigner les composantes matérielles du monde (physiques, chimiques, biologiques, sociales et techniques). Il propose l’adoption d’un matérialisme émergentiste qui, contre tout réductionnisme excessif, permet de penser le vivant dans ce qu’il a de particulier et de s’éloigner de la logique d’indifférenciation épistémologique portée par le concept de non-humain. S’il importe de réintégrer dans la réflexion en sciences sociales la manière dont les êtres humains entrent en interaction avec les autres êtres constituant le monde, il est cependant essentiel d’effectuer une distinction permettant de rendre compte de cette spécificité du vivant afin de saisir les enjeux profonds liés à l’Anthropocène.
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 | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| 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".