Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Peter Swirski. A Lem Reader. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1997. 129 pp. Bibliography. $14.95, paper. The word reader is usually used in titles of books containing passages for instruction or exercise in reading (Oxford English Dictionary, www.oed.com). Thus, the expectation that the Lem Reader is a collection of stories and, perhaps, essays by Lem with introductions or commentaries by Swirski, is justified. But that is not exactly what this book is. The introduction, entitled Stanislaw Lem: A Stranger in a Strange Land, provides a condensed and insightful overview of Lem's work. The chapter title is catchy, but Swirski himself is aware of the difficulties that its interpretation poses. Strange land? Obviously, Lem's strange landscapes always represent the Earth and no matter what the topic or the location of his story is, is firmly rooted in our Biosphere or, rather, Sociosphere. Even when writes about conscious oceans or supercomputers, is interested in the human condition and in the familiar Earthly affairs. Lem a stranger? His works have been translated into more than forty languages and is respected by the literary establishment to the point that he has been featured many times on the Nobel Prize shortlist for his country (p. 15). Yet, his erudition, his aesthetics and philosophy, to which is stubbornly faithful, are so unique in the world of literature that Swirski might be correct in calling him a stranger. The main body of the book consists of two interviews with Lem, entitled Reflections on Literature, Philosophy, and Science and Lan in a Nutshell. The first was conducted in person in 1992, while the second in writing in 1994, which explains a slight difference in their styles: the first is less formal and more conversational, whereas the second is deeper, with more chiseled formulations, almost suitable for a scholarly publication. Nevertheless, both interviews deal with essentially the very topics that have always been the focus of both Lein's and Swirski's attention, namely, the relationship of literature with philosophy and science. The interviewer asks-in a straightforward manner-many difficult questions, such as: Are you a materialist?; Are we about to be overwhelmed by the information crisis?; Do you think that the paradigmatic position of the physical sciences is likely to be usurped in the twenty-first century? Lem's responses are erudite and sincere, sometimes-in the first interview-even quirky. …
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,026 | 0,001 |
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.
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».