Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In "The Possession of Elizabeth Knapp," Samuel Willard observed and wrote about the afflictions of Elizabeth Knapp, but his report is not without flaws.Willard framed his report on Elizabeth Knapp's affliction as a narrative of himself, a self-portrayed holy figure, facing off against the devil, an evil creature possessing a powerless young woman.Willard does this by discounting Knapp's own experiences and by framing her as a character without agency.His report is also affected by his privilege, which causes him to disregard and dehumanize Knapp in the narrative.Overall, Willard's report comes off as an argument for the existence of diabolism-Knapp's diabolism, in particular-that is rooted in patriarchal values.Therefore, Willard's summary of events is questionably reliable, and historians should take caution when approaching it as a factual account of Knapp's affliction.Willard, despite his good intentions, consistently asserted his authority over Knapp in his writings.Often, as a way of doing this, he doubted her and believed her to be lying, and even from the beginning of Knapp's condition, he questioned her.When she first began to act strangely by shrieking and laughing at odd moments, many would ask her how she was, and she would reply, "well" " (Willard 235).Willard wrote that this answer made him "wonder," not trusting his sixteen-year-old servant (Willard 235).As it turned out, of course, he was correct to wonder, but that he was right about this suspicion does not matter as much as that after looking back on the incident, early on he believed that something was wrong with Knapp, even if she would not admit to it.Again and again he questioned her personal accounts of what happened, claiming that they "seemed contradictory," that he was "suspecting the truth of her former story" and that he had "a suspicion of the truth of the relation" (Willard 237, 238, 242).Willard addressed the discrepancies of her stories, mainly those concerning whether or not she had covenanted with the devil, at the end of his report, writing, "Her declarations have been so
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,003 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».