MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W851924017

Philosophy and Aboriginal Rights: Critical Dialogues

2014· article· en· W851924017 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of native studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and Beyond
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsidePoliticsVirtuePolitical philosophyIndigenousSociologyEnvironmental ethicsLawPhilosophyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sandra Tomsons and Lorraine Mayer eds., Philosophy and Aboriginal Rights: Critical Dialogues. Oxford: OUP Canada, 2013. 512 pages. ISBN 978-0-195-43130-8. $70.95 paperback.There is reason to believe that we have entered on a new sort of relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people (and peoples) in Canada. Some of these reasons are social or political, as in the increased profile of Aboriginal persons in various professional fields or the serious attention which a group such as Idle No More has received. Other reasons are more philosophical and involve the expression of uniquely Aboriginal perspectives on abstract issues and problems. Recognition of Native philosophy as a distinct sub-class of the discipline of philosophy is in its infancy, but while Aboriginal persons may be informed as to the content of these unique perspectives by virtue of being Aboriginal, non-Aboriginals are usually at a loss. There are not many sources to which one can turn for Native philosophy outside of Dennis McPherson and J. Douglas Rabb's Indian From the Inside: Native American Philosophy and Cultural Renewal (2nd ed., McFarland 2011) and Anne Waters's anthology American Indian Thought: Philosophical Essays (Wiley-Blackwell 2003). Aside from these, there is scant literature that would permit interested non-Aboriginal scholars to enter into dialogue with their Native counterparts or colleagues. It is this lack which Tomsons and Mayer's Philosophy and Aboriginal attempts to make good, at least with respect to the political and moral issue stated in its title. So this book is, I think, a welcome one.Fairness of representation requires exchange, and Tomsons and Mayer try to model this dialogue in their conversations which conclude each of the four parts into which the book is divided. Tomsons takes the position of the non-Aboriginal philosopher and Mayer the As artificial as this approach is, nevertheless it is still a step in the right direction. Further, the spiritual grandfathers of the project, Dennis McPherson and Douglas Rabb, provide a prologue for the work, cheekily titled to Any Further Discussion of That May be Considered Aboriginal. The other contributors to the volume also seem to exemplify this spirit of dialogue because twelve of the twenty-nine contributors identify themselves as being Aboriginal or as having Aboriginal ancestry. The division of the book into sections - on the relation of Indigenous philosophy to Aboriginal rights, on the content of those rights, on the notion of Aboriginal sovereignty, and on possible avenues for reconciliation of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal views on these matters - is entirely appropriate and just what one should expect from something that purports to make heard the previously-silent Native voices on these issues.However, there are important deficiencies in this edited volume that cannot be ignored. For one, the quality of the papers is very un- even. Indeed, despite the attempts to articulate some clear notion of Aboriginal philosophy by McPherson and Rabb in their Prolegomena and Tomsons and Mayer in their General Introduction, it's not clear how, for example, Janice Green's What Mauchibinesse Taught Me about Aboriginal Rights can be seen as philosophy. While inclusion of such work is not a serious defect because non-academic contributors will sometimes fail to hit the expected note, it is nevertheless illustrative of a certain immaturity (for lack of a better term) in the subdiscipline of Aboriginal or Native or Indigenous philosophy itself. The same deficiency, for instance, can be observed in Anne Waters's American Indian Thought. Yet it is no aid to the discipline to include as representative cases material that is not clearly philosophical in character. Rabb and McPherson's efforts notwithstanding, treating a descriptive account of one's heritage as phenomenological conflates the distinction between ethnography and philosophy. …

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it