Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the ideas on narrative identity of two promi-nent French philosophers, Jean-Paul Sartre and Pierre Bourdieu. Both independently describe what they call the “biographical illu-sion,” the idea that the events of life are not structured in the same way as they are presented in stories such as biographies. Sartre and Bourdieu both argue against a common conception of narrative identity. Interestingly, however, Bourdieu presents his notion in part as a critique of Sartre’s ideas about identity. By investigating their similarities and differences, light is shed on the debate con-cerning criticism of the classical notion of subjectivity in contempo-rary thought. Cet article explore les idées sur l’identité narrative de deux philo-sophes français éminents, Jean-Paul Sartre et Pierre Bourdieu. Tous deux ont décrit indépendamment ce qu’ils appelaient « l’illusion biographique », l’idée que les événements de la vie ne sont pas structurés de la même manière qu’ils sont présentés dans des récits tels que les biographies. Sartre et Bourdieu s’opposent tous deux à une conception courante de l’identité narrative. Cependant, il est intéressant de noter que Bourdieu présente sa notion en partie comme une critique des idées de Sartre sur l’identité. En examinant leurs similitudes et différences, un éclairage est apporté sur le dé-bat concernant la critique de la notion classique de subjectivité dans la pensée contemporaine.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".