MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052358680 · doi:10.1521/siso.2010.74.2.184

Marx, the French Revolution, and the Spectre of the Bourgeoisie

2010· article· en· W2052358680 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

VenueScience & Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEuropean Political History Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBourgeoisieClass consciousnessPetite bourgeoisieConsciousnessRhetoricPower (physics)Class (philosophy)SociologyAestheticsPolitical economyPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyPoliticsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seeking to deny the bourgeois and capitalist nature of the French Revolution, revisionist scholars have argued that the bourgeoisie did not exist as a class-in-itself or for-itself. The existence of the bourgeoisie as a class-in-itself is increasingly confirmed by recent research. The question whether or not a sense of the bourgeoisie as a class-for-itself developed during the Revolution requires a more complicated response. In The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon , Marx asserted that the consciousness of the revolutionaries was obscured by the rhetoric of classical republicanism. It was only after the Revolution that the French bourgeoisie developed a sense of themselves as a class-for-itself and recognized the Revolution as bourgeois. In fact the upheavals of the Revolution did create a bourgeois consciousness of itself as a class whose strength was based on its growing economic power. But this consciousness was marginalized by the revolutionary leadership because of its potential social divisiveness.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.016
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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