MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4364321220 · doi:10.4236/sm.2023.132006

Inception of Life on the Pendulum of Death: Common Paradigms and Uncommon Narratives on the Polemics between Birthers and Abortionists

2023· article· en· W4364321220 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Onyedika Michaels, Felicia Ihuoma Michaels, Susan Otto

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology Mind · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeSociologyPower (physics)AbortionEpistemologyAestheticsLiteraturePhilosophyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obvious crevices of digression are discernible in the ongoing discourses on conception, women and reproductive rights, and abortion. Against this backdrop, this paper sets out to explore existing thoughts on the bio-physiological processes of conception and pregnancy, epigenetics, and the impact of trauma on the continuum of human psychological development with a view to accentuating the critical intersection of the emerging discourses. By dissecting the conflated and intricate leanings on the opposite sides of the treatise, the paper goes beyond the current paradigm that merely proffers a time frame at which it might be appropriate to legitimize termination of pregnancy (in other words, abort a baby without attracting punitive attention of the state) and advance more creative theorizing, which raises the question of power balance and discipline. Ours is a discussion paper, covering a methodical synopsis of discourses, definitions, aims, philosophical leanings and content analysis of major postulations, and highlights of their operational intricacies. The paper hypothesized that a single-cell blastocyst is a developing human being and engaging discourses on power and discipline, it further explored the influences of epigenetics on lifespan development, and how this impinges on women’s right over their reproductive bodies. The paper adopts the Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), and black feminist thought to deconstruct and trouble the essentialized notion of women’s reproductive rights, which are fundamentally colonial, and western in nature. Using qualitative content analysis of existing secondary materials, we foreground the paradigm shifts on the contended topic. By so doing, the paper mapped out a more flexible direction for understanding the disequilibrium of power on the core premises of the argument divides. Our paper provides uncluttered lenses for scrutinizing the socio-medical procedures involving women’s right to their procreative bodies on one hand, and the unborn babies’ choice of life on the other, thus creating a broader and more objective rostrum for further discussion and scholarly contribution on the concepts.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociology MindSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207