Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article returns to Roger Caillois’ analysis of gambling in his classic text Man, Play, and Games, to provide a framework for understanding the place of widespread legal gambling in late modern culture. The discussion begins with Caillois’ response to Johan Huizinga’s formulations of play and exclusion of gambling from the world of play and games. It then proceeds with Caillois’ rehabilitation of games of chance as culturally significant phenomena. Drawing on some of the central themes of Man, Play, and Games, contemporary gambling is then analyzed, and factors such as the cultural and economic shaping of the social distribution of agon (competition) and alea (chance) provide the basis for an interpretation of the contemporary pervasiveness of games of chance as a socially- and culturally- situated historical phenomenon and “theme” of late modern culture. In this culture, the spatial and temporal boundaries that both Huizinga and Caillois claim mark play off from everyday life have been blurred in the case of gambling games. The article also posits that alea not only “complements” agon, but competes with it, as alea has been legitimated as a social and economic ethic.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".