MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400650379 · doi:10.1080/00207578.2024.2350226

A machine of the same: Repetition in the foundational discourse of the Argentinean “being” (1976–1983)

2024· article· en· W4400650379 on OpenAlexaff
Cecilia Taiana

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Psychoanalysis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, violence, and history
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepetition (rhetorical device)LinguisticsComputer scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the example of the military regime in Argentina (1976-1983) and relevant archival materials, this article demonstrates the prerequisite of exalted language in constructing an enemy and how a discursive 'machine of the same' was put into operation. The author argues that what made this operation unique is its structure of repetition that stimulated "the tendency to merge" what is "foreigner-to-the-ego", and the "enemy outside" into a single concept in the Argentinian national psyche.As a theoretical lens, the author examines the military regime's language through Freud's understanding of groups and civilization and Laplanche's proposition that cultural narratives in the form of mytho-symbolic explanations help us translate the sexual drive and offer a "solution" to the helplessness of the infant-adult.The author further claims that at other times a cultural narration functions as an anti-translation device when set against the emergence of a new net of significations. The nation's founding narrative of an Occidental-Spanish-Catholic "being" that first effaced its indigenous origins and then its Arabic and Jewish inheritance was brought back by the military regime as a mytho-symbolic narration that formed a shield against the repressed remnants of the enigmatic message pressing for a new translation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.022
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of PsychoanalysisSame topicMemory, violence, and historyFrench-language works237,207