MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011684456 · doi:10.1017/s0008423905389992

Love and Politics: Re-interpreting Hegel

2005· article· en· W2011684456 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua D. Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Theory and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegelianismPoliticsAsideSuspectGeorge (robot)TechnocracyAutonomyDemocracySociologyPhilosophyLawEpistemologyPolitical scienceHistoryArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Love and Politics: Re-interpreting Hegel, Alice Ormiston, SUNY series in Hegelian Studies; Albany: State University of New York Press, 2004, pp. ix, 164. John, Paul, George and Ringo remind us that “all you need is love.” I suspect most would agree with The Beatles when, pausing in our scholarly endeavours, we glance about at the gloomy train wreck of many a personal relationship. When we return to our vocation's most gripping questions—How are community and individual autonomy to be harmonized? How is reason to be satisfied and yet ordinary emotional experience affirmed? How can democratic institutions be strengthened against technocratic thinking and control?—love is no doubt put aside and the serious work of theorizing real solutions begins. Ormiston's project is to rescue love as a solution to just such questions.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.073
Scholarly communication0.0140.020
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0070.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicCritical Theory and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207