MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388450968 · doi:10.25071/2817-5344/52

On the Biopolitics of Suicide

2023· article· en· W4388450968 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary Gan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Academic Mind · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopowerRhetoricNarrativeSociologyAgency (philosophy)WitnessFraming (construction)PoliticsAestheticsCriminologyLawPolitical scienceHistorySocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay critically examines the biopoliticization of suicide, challenging its framing as a public health issue which obscures its cultural and philosophical significance. Drawing from Michel Foucault’s theories of biopower, this essay argues that suicide is externalized, massified, and medicalized under the discourse of public health, leading to its subjugation to biopower’s rhetoric. At the core of this narrative is a powerful presupposition that suicide is separable from the individual who commits the act. Drawing from Primo Levi’s The Drowned and the Saved and Judith Butler’s essay Violence, Politics, and Mourning, this essay conceives suicide as an intentional act of agency, occurring under particular conditions of emotional duress which are created by a historical relay of societal violence. This essay seeks to dismantle the prevailing narrative of suicide, free suicide from its biopolitical rhetoric, and argues that suicide ought to be understood as a radical act which bears witness against the violence of the biopolitical state.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.063
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueCanadian Journal for the Academic MindSame topicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207