MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1991061654 · doi:10.1353/utq.2005.0108

On Enlightenment (review)

2004· article· en· W1991061654 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Graeme K. Hunter

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueScience and Climate Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEnlightenmentDissentArt historySociologyHistoryLiteratureLawPhilosophyReligious studiesArtTheologyPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: On Enlightenment Graeme Hunter (bio) David Stove. On Enlightenment. Edited by Andrew Irvine Transaction 2002. xxxvi, 185. US $34.95 When he died in 1994, David Stove enjoyed an excellent reputation both as a Hume scholar and as a philosopher of science. But it was as an essayist, rather than as an academic writer, that he built up a large and loyal readership across the English-speaking world. To anyone who has never encountered Stove the essayist it will be difficult to explain the nature of his charm. The first popular essay of Stove's I encountered was a piece of social criticism called 'A Farewell to Arts: Marxism, Semiotics and Feminism.' When this essay appeared in the mid-1980s the topics it discussed were among the current idols of the cave, and untenured professors like myself were expected to worship them. Religious dissent and religious tolerance were unknown. Those were the days when universities were described as 'islands of repression in a sea of freedom.' To learn that there was a professor somewhere in Australia courageous enough to put these idols in question, and witty enough to lampoon three of them in a single essay, was intoxicating. Not since puberty had I discovered anything as dangerous and delightful. The person who introduced me to this side of David Stove was Andrew Irvine, a former student of Stove's, now a professor of philosophy at the University of British Columbia and the editor of the present fine collection of essays. It does not include the paper of which I have spoken, but contains fourteen others, each of which is just as good. They concern the nature of the Enlightenment and its legacy. On the one hand, Stove fiercely defends the reasonableness for which the Enlightenment stood, while on the other hand relentlessly exposing both the intellectual pretensions of its progenitors and the follies of its contemporary progeny. It is difficult to find a general category for these essays and it might be a mistake to try. In that respect they resemble their author, of whom Roger Kimball writes in the preface to this volume: 'Stove was that rarest of creatures: a genuinely independent thinker. His allegiance was always to the best argument, the most persuasive reasoning. This made him difficult to categorize, impossible to pigeon-hole.' One unifying thread running through the collection, however, is provided by the critical scrutiny to which it subjects many of the key ideas [End Page 425] of the Enlightenment. And since these tend to be the ideas we take for granted today, readers who are prepared to reconsider some of their conventional assumptions are likely to profit most from this book. Stove offers searching criticisms of utilitarianism, egalitarianism, sociobiology, pacifism, and affirmative action. He explains how it is possible for socialism to make relentless progress even in societies which massively reject it and how conservatism can be so much wiser than liberalism, yet never as popular. And this is accomplished with unfailing clarity and a good deal of humour. Is there a weakness in this collection? There is one. It is too short. Graeme Hunter Graeme Hunter, Department of Philosophy, University of Ottawa Copyright © 2005 University of Toronto Press Incorporated

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,556
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,997

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,199
Écart entre enseignants0,193 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

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'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlyMême sujetScience and Climate StudiesTravaux en français237 207