Una filosofía social de la ciencia. Recepciones y apropiaciones en y de la obra de Ian Hacking: Acerca de Texture in the Work of Ian Hacking: Michel Foucault as the Guiding Thread of Hacking’s Thinking, de María Laura Martínez Rodríguez
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rethinking the work of a philosopher in the light of his influences is a task that requires assuming the different meanings that the notion of influence entails: the selection of “antecessors”, with which the philosopher configures his own canon, his appropriations of the chosen works, as well as the reappropriations that the critical analysts carry out in relation to the receptions and appropriations of the philosopher’s work. Traditions are causal relations constructed from the present. This paper presents an analysis of the ways in which María Laura Martínez Rodríguez appropriates the work of Ian Hacking to account for how the Canadian philosopher links his work with that of Michel Foucault. At the same time, our reception of Martínez Rodríguez’s book highlights the approximations of Hacking’s philosophy to the social studies of science, neo-materialist philosophy and historical epistemology.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".