Collaborative Temporality: Merleau-Ponty and The Phenomenology of Music
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music seems to illuminate the lived experience of embodiment. Described phenomenologically, musical experience reveals what Maurice Merleau-Ponty in the Phenomenology of Perception calls the habit body. In articulating the habit body’s role in music, it becomes clear that music contains the possibility of expanding the habit body, but also of reinforcing or stabilizing it. I bring this insight to bear on work locating the intractability of oppression in rigid and inhibited habit bodies, perpetrated and undergone respectively. Finally, I show how my habit body account of musical experience significantly enhances our understanding of an important and widely reported feature of musical experience: the sense of empowered belonging. I identify a theoretical shortcoming in accounts that source the ‘we’ experience to being in time together and offer an account of collaborative temporality based in the habit body as remedy. In so doing, I identify what Edmund Husserl calls the openness of protentional expectation as the mode in which collaborative temporality can occur, suggesting that the ‘we’ experience found in music is an aspirational one.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".