MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1970090301 · doi:10.1353/hms.2011.0233

Scepticism and Literature: An Essay on Pope, Hume, Sterne, and Johnson (review)

2004· article· en· W1970090301 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. A. Box

Notice bibliographique

RevueHume studies · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueClassical Philosophy and Thought
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSkepticismPhilosophyNothingEpistemologyDilemmaJudgementPsychoanalysisPsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Hume Studies Volume 30, Number 1, April 2004, pp. 204-207 FRED PARKER. Scepticism and Literature: An Essay on Pope, Hume, Sterne, and Johnson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Pp. χ + 290. ISBN 0-19-925318-8, cloth, $65/£50. To carry on reasoning in the face of the implications of skepticism is what Fred Parker calls "sceptical thinking." Not to be confused with the engineered vacillation leading to a tranquillizing suspense of judgement, it involves the double perspective of someone conducting a life, believing and reasoning as we do, while acutely aware that the whole endeavor is, in a sense, untenable. If, as Sir Philip Sidney famously said, an imaginative writer "nothing affirms, and therefore never Iieth," then the dilemma posed by skepticism might be less embarrassing for that kind of writer than for philosophers. The latter purport to offer tenets valued according to their truth, however variously defined; the former, on the other hand, create "speaking pictures," or verbal imitations (cf. Arist. Poetics 1). Skeptically thinking imaginative writers can create speaking pictures of a life in which knowledge is unavailable though people must reason, believe, and act. In a famous letter Keats went so far as to deem a kind of ataraxy to be a condition of the highest art, adducing Shakespeare's "Negative Capability... of being in uncertainties , Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact & reason" (21, 27 December 1817). Parker does not discuss the possibility that negative capability might conduce to the highest flights of literature. He is concerned with the unresolved tensions of skeptical thinking that he sees as complicating key works of literature in the Hanoverian reigns. For their authors and readers, the negativity of skepticism was "disillusioning and destabilizing" (14) if not ameliorated by a humor like Sterne's or an irony like Hume's. Humor or irony arises from the oddity that skepticism is put in its place only when we give up and allow nature to reassert itself. Not heroic measures, but backgammon and making merry with friends prevail over doubt. Sometimes, when the confrontation with skepticism gives rise to the precept of following nature, skepticism can result in "a surprising confidence of assertion" (53). Imaginative writers might be more readily able than philosophers to relish the situation, but nothing prevents a philosopher from taking an intermission to create a speaking picture of skeptical thinking, as Hume did at the end of Book 1 of the Treatise. Thus, Parker puts Hume in the company of Pope, Sterne, and even Samuel Johnson as reflecting an efflorescence of skeptical thinking in the eighteenth century. After two chapters of conceptual and historical introduction, each of these four authors gets a chapter in what amounts to an assemblage of independent but linked essays somewhat in the fashion of Hume's Philosophical Hume Studies Book Reviews 205 Essays. In this review I will concentrate more on the chapters of most concern to those interested in Hume. Readers of this journal will not be surprised to hear that Montaigne's assaying ruminations, Locke's "destabilizing epistemology" (33), and Bayle's oscillations in argument set the stage for this efflorescence of skeptical thinking. Chapter 2 is devoted to the collateral damage of Locke's endeavor to clear the ground a little of the rubbish obstructing the way to knowledge. Locke's critics, early and late, correctly found skeptical implications in the way of ideas, and though the Essay was intended as a vaccination against scepticism, "it was a vaccine which carried some risk of transmitting the condition in active and perhaps virulent form" (61). Locke's empiricist program depended alarmingly on suppositions that, normally if not reliably, our words stand for ideas in an intersubjectively uniform way and that ideas represent external reality. Also alarming was Locke's suspicious attempt to exempt moral and religious language from the contingent relation between words and reality that he had elsewhere insisted was a plentiful source of error. In chapter 3, Parker juxtaposes Pope's Essay on Man (1733-34) with (a) the First Epistle ofthe First Book of Horace Imitated (1738) and (b) the philosophical essays of Pope's supposed mentor, Henry St. John, Lord Bolingbroke. In the Epistle, Pope...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,038

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0110,016
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,006
Communication savante0,0080,010
Science ouverte0,0020,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,072
Tête enseignante GPT0,305
Écart entre enseignants0,233 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHume studiesMême sujetClassical Philosophy and ThoughtTravaux en français237 207