Autonomie collective et pluralisme juridique : Georges Gurvitch, Hugo Sinzheimer et le droit du travail
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En 1931, Georges Gurvitch publiait chez Vrin Le temps présent et l’idée de droit social . C’est dans cet ouvrage qu’apparaît pour la première fois, à la connaissance de l’auteur, le concept de « pluralisme juridique », dont on connaît la fortune subséquente. Dans cet ouvrage, Gurvitch présentait notamment au lectorat francophone une synthèse de la pensée d’Hugo Sinzheimer, le fondateur de la science moderne du droit du travail, mobilisé en appui à la conception pluraliste du droit. La pierre angulaire de la construction de Sinzheimer reposait sur la notion célèbre « d’autonomie collective », retenue unanimement par la doctrine travailliste contemporaine. Dans cet article, l’auteur compare la pensée de Gurvitch avec celle de Sinzheimer, de manière à en mettre en lumière les éléments toujours fondamentaux pour l’étude sociologique du droit du travail contemporain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".