Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Immanuel Kant’s idea of hospitality has been highly influential in contemporary migration and refugee studies. In this chapter, I review his idea and the literature that has interpreted it and examine Kant’s motivations for defining the right to hospitality in a way that permits visitation but not long-term settlement. Despite accusations that racism and support for capitalist enterprise shaped Kant’s reasoning of hospitality, I contend that we should take Kant at face value when he wrote that limits to hospitality aim to protect non-European and Indigenous peoples from colonialisation. The state-centrism and Cartesian spatial logic that represent Kant’s idea of hospitality contradict the place-based logic of his anthropological and geographical scholarship. Kant’s attempt to prevent colonialisation thus follows a state-centric and Cartesian spatial logic that is inherently Eurocentric and that continues to permeate migration and refugee scholarship and international institutions such as the United Nations. Not only do the traditional knowledge and governance systems of colonised and Indigenous peoples tend to follow a place-based logic, but—I propose—urban approaches towards migrant inclusion and refugee protection also embrace this place-based logic. I discuss if urban hospitality can therefore offer a non-colonial perspective that escapes Kantian Eurocentrism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".