Baroque constitution and hybrid political language: the case of Juan de Mariana (1535-1624) and Juan Márquez (1565-1621)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El presente art?culo busca llamar la atenci?n a la creatividad y elasticidad intelec tual que se encuentra en el pensamiento pol?tico del barroco cat?lico. M?s espec? ficamente, examina c?mo dos te?logos cat?licos espa?oles abordaron el problema de hacer compatible la ?tica cristiana con las exigencias de la Realpolitik Juan de Mariana (1535-1624) y Juan M?rquez (1565-1621) transcendieron conscientemen te las fronteras discursivas establecidas para recontextualizar el pensamiento y la acci?n pol?tica espa?ola. En su De Rege (1599) el jesu?ta Mariana fusiona con ceptos y metodolog?as escol?sticos y humanistas en un lenguaje h?brido sobre la raz?n de estado que integra elementos aristot?lico-tomistas y agustino-cat?licos, as? como estoicos y esc?pticos en una evaluaci?n decididamente pr?ctica de la pol?tica. El gobernador cristiano (1612), por su parte, muestra al agustino M?r quez como campe?n de la ortodoxia tomista-aristot?lica. M?rquez propone t?r minos y m?todos de investigaci?n humanistas y escol?sticos como ?nica fuente de consejo para el pol?tico. Cada uno deforma distinta ejemplifica la capacidad dis cursiva y el dominio de tecnolog?as de conocimiento del barroco. Su capacidad de responder a una realidad compleja de manera flexible y pragm?tica puede bien ser considerada uno de los rasgos fundamentales de la constituci?n del barroco.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".