MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048656082 · doi:10.1177/0896920514540184

Croce, Philosophy and Intellectuals: Three Aspects of Gramsci’s Theory of Hegemony

2014· article· en· W2048656082 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Sociology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical theory and Gramsci
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegemonySubalternEpistemologySociologyPolitical philosophyConsciousnessCultural hegemonyPhilosophyLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been a recent revival of interest in Gramsci’s theory of hegemony. Within this revival, some scholars have focused upon the question of the sources of Gramsci’s theory, particularly with reference to linguistic sources; others have focused upon applications of Gramsci’s theory of hegemony, particularly in conjunction with the question of the subaltern. This article seeks to contribute to this revival by nuancing three aspects of Gramsci’s theory of hegemony. Firstly, Croce’s presumed influence over the latter is rejected in favor of a commonality of concerns with a whole generation of Italian intellectuals, not just Croce. Secondly, it is emphasized that philosophy played an important role in Gramsci’s theory of hegemony in that it provided the all-important critiques of common sense and false consciousness. Lastly, it is argued that the intellectuals’ need for a new hegemony was not just organic but included traditional intellectuals in complex new formations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
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 score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.012
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.296 · 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