Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we reconsider Marcel Mauss’s concept of the ‘total social fact’ (TSF) and its potential to redefine the sociological analysis of various phenomena. The prevailing interpretation of TSFs in the literature, which we refer to as the ‘Social Totality’ approach, focuses on phenomena sitting at the intersection of multiple social sites or spheres. We argue that there is an alternative interpretation, in which the Maussian TSF is intended to denote a tripartite framework for explaining phenomena at the intersection of the biological, the psychological, and the social, which we term the ‘Human Totality’ approach to TSFs. The Human Totality approach aligns more closely with current trends in contemporary sociology, which are increasingly incorporating insights from embodiment, psychology, neuroscience, and cognitive science. We illustrate the analytic utility of the Human Totality approach by examining the phenomenon of addiction as a Maussian TSF, showing how its biological, psychological, and social dimensions intersect and interact. We close by noting how the Human Totality conception of TSFs could lead to a more holistic and robust sociological science by bridging explanatory gaps between different intra and interdisciplinary perspectives.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".