Bibliographic record
Abstract
As boundaries between domesticity and the undomesticated increasingly blur for cohabitants of Vancouver Island, home to North America's densest cougar population, predatorial problems become more and more pressing.Rosemary-Claire Collard responds on a pragmatic plane, arguing that the encounter between human and cougar is only ever destructive, that contact results in death and almost always for the cougar.Advocating for vigilance in policing boundaries separating cougar from civilization, therefore, she looks to Foucault's analysis of modern biopower in the first volume of his History of Sexuality for support in favor of a more contemporary notion of biosecurity.In response to Collard's arguments, concerned with ethical conclusions drawn on the basis of her policy-based proposal, I challenge the prohibition she places on encounter.In the first section, "Becoming Killable," I address her use of Donna Haraway's phraseology, and in the second section, "Biological Dangers," I scrutinize her reading of Foucault, arguing that the appeals she makes distort the mode of argumentation at work for each thinker.The final section, "Facing Cougar, Facing Death," advocates further ethical possibilities generated on the basis of Foucault's correlation between overcoming the fear of death and resisting abuses of power with respect to others.My contention is that our transgressing boundaries constructed to separate humanity from the inhumane curtails tendencies toward the marginalization and subjugation of those animal others whose very existence brings us face to face with the fact of our own mortality.Q. Do you think the role of philosophy is to warn of the dangers of power?M. F. This has always been an important function of philosophy.In its critical aspect-and I mean critical in a broad sense-philosophy is that which calls into question domination at every level and in every form in which in which it exists, whether political, economic, sexual, institutional, or what have you.To a certain extent, this critical function of philosophy derives from the Socratic injunction "Take care of yourself," in other words, "make freedom your foundation, through the mastery of yourself."(Foucault 1997a, 300-301)
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".