Le libéralisme de l’inquiétude : Friedrich Hayek et Judith Shklar1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte propose une analyse de certaines dimensions de la pensée de deux auteurs libéraux, Friedrich A. Hayek et Judith N. Shklar, qui ont été rarement analysés ensemble et, parfois même, ont été oubliés, notamment dans le cas de la seconde. Il s’agit de montrer, à partir de la notion de l’inquiétude, que ces deux libéraux illustrent un aspect de la diversité de la pensée libérale, et ce, à partir d’une même appréhension critique à l’égard des capacités de la raison. Or, si Hayek et Shklar s’entendaient sur les profondes limitations de la raison humaine à maîtriser les flux sociaux, nous montrons que ces deux auteurs divergent quant à l’orientation générale qu’ils donnent au libéralisme. Alors que le libéralisme de la peur de Shklar l’amenait à vouloir réconcilier le libéralisme avec un État palliant les injustices subies par les opprimés, celui d’Hayek l’entraînait plutôt à dénoncer les mirages de la justice sociale.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".