“Without Losing Sight of the Concrete”: Critical and Metacritical Theories of Race
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The shifting dynamics of racial domination across historical contexts present a problem for critical philosophy of race. Much of the literature has focused on answering the question of “What is race?” as the solution to the problem of dynamic variability. In what follows, this article proposes that a better solution should begin with answering the question “What must the world be like for race to shift appearances across contexts?” Answering the latter question recapitulates the classic tension between appearance and reality. A core feature of racial domination is that it abstracts from social relations by presenting them as natural. Drawing on the tradition of critical theory from Karl Marx to Roy Bhaskar, this article argues that the task of critical philosophy of race is primarily explanatory rather than moral. The wrongness of racial domination follows from the critical elucidation of how a given society systemically induces the misrecognition of social conditions and thus blocks the realization of emancipatory agency. By presenting a clearer picture of what the world is like, critical philosophy of race can better aid our capacity for self-emancipation.
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 | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.071 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".