From autonomy to the common: interviews Christian Laval and Pierre Dardot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This interview by Amador Femández-Savater to Christian Laval and Pierre Dardot addresses the theoretical-political proposal of these two authors about the publication ofhis work Commun: Essai sur la révolution au XXIe siècle, edited in Castilian by Gedisa in the year 2015 (Common: essay on the revolution in the Twenty-First Century). This conversation to three, dips in the validity of the proposals of the genuine collective Socialism or Barbarism of which they took part next to Comelius Castoriadis, paying particular attention to the support of practica! models in the pretension of the group to surpass the purely theoretical development in spaces restricted to the intellectual world. Castoriadis own thinking, especially his conception of the relations between culture and politics, the analysis of the bureaucratization of the social world in capitalism, institutions and the revolution, tied to the modem democratic project. In this context, the Common proposal emerges far a radical democracy capable of facing the neoliberal offensive.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".