MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380667315 · doi:10.59817/cjes.v10i.84

What is Violence? On Hannah Arendt’s Critique of Frantz Fanon

2019· article· en· W4380667315 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCrossings A Journal of English Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNorth African History and Literature
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismHumanityInterpretation (philosophy)Context (archaeology)SociologyPerspective (graphical)Colonial ruleDehumanizationPsychoanalysisPhilosophyLawPolitical scienceHistoryAnthropologyArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth offers a strong intellectual framework established on the author’s medical and social experiences to overthrow colonial rule. Specifically, the text is Frantz Fanon’s interpretation of the mechanisms of colonialism and of revolution from the perspective of the Algerian struggle to get rid of French colonial rule. Out of the five chapters of the book, the first one, “On Violence,” where Fanon supports violence as a requisite weapon to bring down colonial rule towards national liberation and the reinstallation of humanity in the colonized world, is the one often “misunderstood and misrepresented” (Brydon). This paper, by presenting a critique of works such as Hannah Arendt’s views on violence, argues that Fanon’s concept of violence has to be engaged with and understood within the context in which Fanon has framed it, particularly the Algerian struggle.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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