Utopias de humanização do capitalismo: a crise da intelectualidade crítica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artigo busca questionar algumas críticas recentes à forma contemporânea e senil do capitalismo, que não alcançam a radicalidade do questionamento à forma-capital. A ideia é mostrar que uma gama de intelectuais críticos de diversas correntes apresenta propostas para a transformação do mundo que são, a um tempo, utópicas no sentido negativo de construtos ideais incoerentes e inexequíveis, e carentes de utopia no sentido positivo da imaginação de uma vida social radicalmente distinta do atual. Examinamos as críticas de autores de diferentes escolas filosóficas: o liberal Thomas Piketty, os foucaultianos Pierre Dardot e Christian Laval e, oriundos do marxismo, André Gorz e David Harvey. O objetivo é argumentar que a crise em que se encontra a intelectualidade crítica está ligada à sua falta de radicalidade. Secundariamente, este artigo também aponta que, em algumas das teorias que examinamos, a falta de radicalidade das teses pode ter como base o apego aos privilégios da “classe intelectual”.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| 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".