MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969648782 · doi:10.1177/0047117811404445

Peace through Transformation? Political Realism and the Progressivism of National Security

2011· article· en· W1969648782 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Robert Schuett

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Relations · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsRealismProgressivismPoliticsPolitical scienceInternational relationsForeign policyPolitical philosophyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical economySociologyEpistemologyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transformationalist thinking is plentiful. The Iraq invasion is the latest example of its failure. Is international political reality destined to be the ‘realm of recurrence and repetition’? This article delineates a political theory of moderate progress found in Hans Morgenthau’s political realism (Realism). Realism recognises the potentiality of transforming international relations, but, warned by its political anthropology, it envisions a distinct philosophy of politics as an effective means for achieving peace. It makes the case for a foreign policy of national security and humility, believing in progress by other means. Based on a renewed engagement with its concepts of the state, national interest and national security, Realism is shown to be critical and progressivist, restrained and realistic. Its nature and structure makes it intellectually incompatible with conservative organicist projects; nor is it reconcilable with radical critical agendas. In search for allies, Realism shows a potential affinity to a moderately Leftist politics and foreign policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.040
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational RelationsSame topicInternational Relations and Foreign PolicyFrench-language works237,207