Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conclusion to the monograph considers objections to the very idea of suicide as a victory through the lens of philosophers from the long eighteenth century to the present. Such philosophers as Immanuel Kant and Albert Camus query how choosing death can establish the successful rebellion of the suicide if the victorious subject ceases to exist. I address this concern with reference to the eternising nature of textuality in the literary trope of rebellious suicide and suicide as a means of defining subjecthood, as Achille Mbembe, Martin Heidegger and Maurice Blanchot discuss. Romanticism and Subversive Suicide ends with a consideration of how current changes in attitudes towards suicide in Western culture suggest that we might finally be moving beyond the long-standing reticence to discuss suicide and the one-dimensional view of it as significant only of insanity, both of which have plagued the issue from the Romantic period until recently. Changes in laws concerning euthanasia in Canada and expanded public debates about the topic in Britain suggest that the Romantic-era emphasis on suicide as a human right is, again, entering the cultural conversation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".