Bibliographic record
Abstract
The past few years have seen a rise in attempts to decolonize curricula, pedagogies, classrooms and knowledge production. In this paper, I provided a six-step argument for reading and teaching Weber – among other scholarly writings – in times of intellectual decolonization. I argue that (1) Weber’s calls for scientific rigour and the prevalence of social causality over biological, culturalist or other essentialist interpretations, as well as (2) his uncovering of racist ideology embedded in social institutions are more relevant than ever. I then follow Weber in (3) theorizing the emergence of ethnic feelings of communalization as the outcome of unequal power relations tied to migration, conquest, and colonization. (4) This relationship of domination/subordination is conducive to a differential sense of self and dignity with members of majority and minority populations. (5) Based on Weber’s epistemology, these diverse “standpoints” need to be included into the curriculum as they contribute valuable pieces to the overarching puzzle of human knowledge. (6) Weber’s call for a strict separation of science and politics, however, prohibits political activism and “professorial prophecy” in the lecture hall or classroom. For Weber, the professor should not teach students what they should do, only what they may want to do.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 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".