Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Along with fundamental rights such as liberty and property, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789 also envisions a right to resist oppression. Irrespective of one's place on the political spectrum, resistance has been employed as an alternative both to submission and to revolt. After briefly sketching a historical and theoretical account of resistance I propose two parallel sets of criteria to further characterize good resistance. I submit that the first set is normative (I call it emancipatory) and the second set is critical (meaning it can be empirically assessed). I further break this typology down as follows: (1) Resistance is emancipatory when it is (a) nonviolent, (b) progressive, and (c) civil; and (2) it is critical when it seeks to (a) change policies and practices that are unjust, and (b) empower citizens to enjoy their full rights. I show the usefulness of this scheme by applying it to the political situation in Iran and by evincing these criteria in three instances of resistance there. Thus, in this context, I argue, resistance is a preferable alternative to both revolution and reform.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.068 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".