Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Science and expertise have been antithetical forms of knowledge in both the ancient and the modern world, but they appear identical in today's postmodern world, especially in the Science & Technology Studies (STS) literature.The ancient Athenians associated science (epistemé) with the contemplative life afforded to those who lived from inherited wealth.Expertise (techné) was for those lacking property, and hence citizenship.Such people were regularly forced to justify their usefulness to Athenian society.Some foreign merchants, collectively demonised in Plato's Dialogues as 'sophists', appeared so insulting to citizen Socrates, because they dared to alienate aspects of this leisured existence (e.g. the capacity for articulate reasoning) and repackage them as techniques that might be purchased on demand from an expert -that is, a sophist.In effect, the sophists cleverly tried to universalise their own alien status, taking full advantage of the strong analogy that Athenians saw between the governance of the self and the polis.Unfortunately, Plato, the original spin doctor, immortalised Socrates' laboured and hyperbolic rearguard response to these sly and partially successful attempts at dislodging hereditary privilege.In any case, science and expertise led a more harmonious existence in the pre-modern Christian era, as everyone was expected to live by the sweat of their brow, an aspect of the labour theory of value that joined Thomas Aquinas to Karl Marx.Medieval monasteries were the original communes, in which the monks alternated between contemplating God and taking turns at the scriptorium and/or the vineyard.A privatised version of this ethic came to be known as the 'Renaissance Man', as exemplified by the careers of Leonardo da Vinci and especially Galileo.In this context, the boundary separating science and expertise became more porous, specifically enabling technical arts of instrumentation and experimentation to become constitutive of scientific inquiry itself.The Royal Society of London famously institutionalised that attitude.However, the unprecedented achievement of Newtonian mechanics led * Steve Fuller is Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick, UK.Originally trained in history and philosophy of science (Ph.D., University of Pittsburgh, 1985), he is best known for 'social epistemology', the name of a journal he founded in 1987 and the first of his fifteen books, the most recent of which include The knowledge book: Key concepts in philosophy, science and culture (Acumen and McGill-Queens University Press, 2007), New frontiers in Science and Technology Studies (Polity, 2007), and Science vs Religion?Intelligent Design and the problem of evolution.His works have been translated into more than fifteen languages.In 2007 he was awarded a 'higher doctorate' (D.Litt.)by Warwick for distinguished contributions to scholarship.He was recently elected President for the Sociology and Social Policy section of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,014 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,031 | 0,004 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».