MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W168823491 · doi:10.3138/jcs.36.1.80

Liberalism and the Limits of Multiculturalism

2001· article· en· W168823491 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raphael Cohen‐Almagor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismLiberalismAccommodationDiversity (politics)SociologyState (computer science)Liberal democracyReasonable accommodationLawIntervention (counseling)Raising (metalworking)Minority rightsPolitical scienceLaw and economicsPolitical economyGender studiesHuman rightsPoliticsDemocracyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most pressing issues facing liberal democracies today is the politicization of ethnocultural diversity. Minority cultures are demanding greater public recognition of their distinctive identities and greater freedom and opportunity to retain and develop their distinctive cultural practices. In response to these demands, new and creative mechanisms are being adopted in many countries for accommodating difference. This essay discusses some of the issues raised by these demands, focussing in particular on the difficulties that arise when the minority seeking accommodation is illiberal. Undoubtedly, ethnocultural relations are often full of complications that defy simple categories or easy answers; however, we can make some progress if we draw some distinctions between different kinds of groups and different kinds of group rights. This essay probes the nature of liberal tolerance and then delineates the limits of state intervention by looking at some troubling practices and analyzing pertinent court judgements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207