A TEORIA POLÍTICA DA PROPRIEDADE NA ERA MODERNA: ASCENSÃO E CRÍTICA DO INDIVIDUALISMO POSSESSIVO / A POLITICAL THEORY OF PROPERTY IN THE MODERN ERA: RISE AND CRITIC OF POSSESSIVE INDIVIDUALISM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12957/rqi.2012.9867 Trabalho recebido e avaliado pelo Conselho executivo da Revista Quaestio Iuris Resumo O presente trabalho apresenta um estudo sobre o surgimento e o desenvolvimento do conceito de propriedade no início da era moderna. Através do prisma da teoria política, adotando-se como marco teórico a noção de individualismo possessivo, formulada pelo filósofo político canadense C.B. Macpherson, serão demonstrados os pilares e as funcionalidades desse conceito que, antes de ser disciplinado pelo direito, já possui uma série de conotações políticas, econômicas e filosóficas, adequadas a um determinado modelo de concepção e estruturação da sociedade. Palavras-chave: Propriedade. Era Moderna. Individualismo Possessivo. C.B. Macpherson. Abstract This paper presents a study on the emergence and development of the concept of property in the early modern era. Through the prism of political theory, adopting the theoretical framework the notion of possessive individualism, formulated by canadian political philosopher C.B. Macpherson, will be demonstrated pillars and features of the concept that, before be disciplined by law, already has a number of connotations political, economic and philosophical, belonging to a particular model of designing and structuring of society. Keywords: Property. Modern Era. Possessive Individualism. C. B. Macpherson.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".