Anthropologie et sociobiologie : les fondements d'une possible intégration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RÉSUMÉ/ ABSTRACT Anthropologie et Sociobiologie : Les fondements d'une possible intégration Dans cet article, nous comparons les épistémologies respectives de la sociobiologie et de l'anthropologie afin de situer leurs points d'articulation et d'établir les fondements de leur éventuelle intégration. Ces deux perspectives nous paraissent se rejoindre en ce qu'elles supposent toutes deux l'existence d'une unicité psychique humaine organisant la variabilité culturelle. Elles diffèrent toutefois au niveau des chemins qu'elles empruntent pour caractériser cette unicité et arriver à des théories du social. Nous mettons en lumière les faiblesses inhérentes à chacune de ces perspectives prises isolément et nous suggérons, au-delà de la polarité réductionnisme/" irréductionisme ", une intégration disciplinaire de type vertical, telle qu'elle se pratique couramment dans le monde scientifique.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".