Strong process and rural becoming: Geography, organization, creativity, and metaphysics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation situated in rural inquiry explores the movement toward a Whiteheadian (creative, eventful, speculative) approach to rural geography. I approach this endeavour in four formal and variously related chapters (Chapters 2-5) that are ordered sequentially only to a degree and that each stand on their own. In Chapter 2, I outline broadly what a rural geography inspired by Whitehead’s process philosophy (philosophy of organism) might look like. I utilize the fruitful, Lefebvrian model of rural space as developed by Halfacree and reinterpret its elements through a Whiteheadian model of becoming. The movement is one from spatialization (spatial dialectics) to concrescence (process philosophy). I trace a conceptual pathway from the former to the latter and outline some broad implications for rural studies. In Chapter 3, I combine some of the sensibilities of Chapter 2 with elements of the process organizational literature as inspired by Whitehead. The first part of this chapter articulates a commonality of place and organization as found in events. The latter part explores the applicability of this developed model via a modest case study of an organization called Gateway. In Chapter 4, I outline both a regulationist lens through which the coherence and direction of social enterprise in putative rural spaces can be interrogated, and an ‘eventful’ lens through which the hybridity and sociality of rural social enterprise takes on new meaning. In Chapter 5, I outline how Whitehead’s notion of creativity can supplement traditional and popular conceptions of creativity, and then explore some implications of this approach to creativity for an organization called the Canadian Centre for Rural Creativity (CCRC). This dissertation is also bookended by a preface (Chapter 1) which outlines an informal and educational narrative surrounding the building of the formal chapters, and an epilogue (Chapter 6) which attempts to partially locate and illuminate the nexus of inquiry around which the four formal chapters share a common orbit.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".