Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le texte qui suit est une étude critique de la proposition d'une allocation universelle comme revenu de citoyenneté faite par Philippe Van Parijs. Cette proposition est analysée dans la perspective de la théorie de la justice de John Rawls. L'étude montre qu'une telle allocation est contraire à la justice sociale, telle que la conçoit Rawls, sur la base du fait qu'elle crée une situation sociale qui, non seulement ne se prête pas à la réalisation de la justice comme il la conçoit dans A Theory of Justice (1971), mais engendre une situation qui la rend impossible. Cette impossibilité repose sur le non-respect de la participation des individus à la production sociale qui est nécessaire selon une conception de la société comme organisation de coopération sociale et également selon la tradition contractualiste à laquelle se sont intéressés Locke, Rousseau et Kant et que Rawls reprend à son compte.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".