Race And The Habits Of Scholarship Of Critical Social Thought
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper interrogates the status of race as a valid social problematic in critical social thought, with particular regard to its role in the production of what counts as the political. This path of interrogation is animated by a particular problem with the timely and galvanizing treatment of the very valuable meta-categories, ‘redistribution’ and ‘recognition’, that feminist political philosopher Nancy Fraser contributes to the critical conversation about the state of the political, primarily through her 1997 ‘Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the Postsocialist Condition’. Fraser diagnoses an interruption in the ‘grammar of political claims-making’ in late capitalist globalization which is so severe that a condition of ‘justice interruptus’ and ‘postsocialist commonsense’, implied also as a postmodern one, is enacted in the ordering of the political. In this condition ‘claims for the recognition of group difference have become intensely salient’ resulting in a ‘relative eclipse’ of a ‘politics of redistribution’ by a ‘politics of recognition’ and a ‘decoupling’ of them. Fraser addresses this breach by reappraising the meanings and performances of these two dimensions of the political and re-associating them within a ‘bivalent’ rubric. Deploying ‘an archaeology of memory’ mode of inquiry, culled from the work of Robert Hill, David Scott, Raymond Williams and Sylvia Wynter, this paper argues that race surfaces as a false conscious, materially deficit, subordinate and second-guessed rendering of the critical political. This disturbing situation, termed the beleaguered status of race, constrains and complicates the purchase of Fraser's prospectus. The paper implicates historical, ethical, and ideological habits of the transdisciplinary and differential terrain of critical social thought in effecting this status on race.
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 | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.115 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 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".