Genetic disorder as metaphor and the construction of the abnormal self
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Narrative ethics is particularly important in examining and improving the experience of patients with genetic disorders.Such an exercise includes careful consideration of the figures of speech that influence people's beliefs and actions, including the metaphors which have arisen to help convey the semi-abstract nature of the gene.This thesis examines the development of genetic metaphors over the course of the 20 th century, noting the significance of particular representations of genetics like those of virus, language, lottery and soul.Based on these findings, metaphors of genetic disorder are characterized into the opposing conceptions of "genetic disorder versus self" as independent entities and "genetic disorder as self" as a characteristic of one's identity.Each of these categories of metaphor carries its own unique bioethical consequences.Finally, this thesis discusses recommendations for influencing the future development of these metaphors and the practicality of such plans. RsumL'thique narrative est particulirement importante dans l'examen et l'amlioration des expriences des patients avec des troubles gntiques.Cette examen doit inclure une tude I would like to thank my co-supervisors, Profs.Yann Joly and
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".