MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W619320854

Critical disability theory : essays in philosophy, politics, policy, and law

2005· book· en· W619320854 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivilege (computing)Disability studiesPityCitizenshipPoliticsSociologyInclusion (mineral)Political philosophySympathyPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawSocial psychologyGender studiesPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with disabilities in Canada experience and inhabit a system of deep structural, economic, social, political, legal, and cultural inequality - a regime of dis-citizenship. Despite the widespread belief that Canada is a country of liberty, equality, and inclusion, many persons with disabilities experience social exclusion and marginalization. They are socially constructed as second-class citizens. Critical Disability Theory enquires into the possibilities and parameters of a critical theory of disability. Its essays argue that accommodating equality for the disabled is not fundamentally a question of medicine or health, nor is it just an issue of sensitivity or compassion. Rather, it is a question of politics, of power and powerlessness. Conventional understandings of disability are dependent upon assumptions that characterize disability as misfortune and by implication privilege the normal over the abnormal. Consequently, it is presumed that societal organization based upon able-bodied and -minded norms is inevitable and the best we can do is show sympathy or pity. This book argues that we need new ways to think about the nature of disability, a new understanding of participatory citizenship that encompasses the disabled, new policies to respond to their needs, and a new vision of their entitlements. Twenty-four scholars from a variety of disciplines come together here to identify the problems with traditional approaches to disability and to provide new directions. The essays range from focused empirical and experiential studies of different disabilities, to policy analyses, legal interrogations, and philosophical reconsiderations. The result will be of interest to policy makers, professionals, academics, non-governmental organizations, and grass-roots activists.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.010
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations273
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207