Que permet de penser le concept d’imaginaire social de Charles Taylor ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans Modern Social Imaginaries , Charles Taylor définit le concept d’imaginaire social comme « compréhension de soi » d’une société, mais également comme « répertoire » des pratiques que ses membres peuvent adopter. Cette double définition rattache à la fois le concept à une perspective herméneutique et à une perspective wittgensteinienne centrée sur l’analyse des règles constitutives des pratiques sociales. Nous éclairons ce concept d’imaginaire social à l’aide du concept d’« arrière-plan », plus ancien dans l’oeuvre de Taylor, afin de montrer que celui-ci ne fait pas droit à la perspective d’inspiration wittgensteinienne qu’il invoque. Cette analyse nous amène à contester la thèse de Taylor selon laquelle les pratiques ont pour condition de possibilité la compréhension implicite de la société que partagent les individus. Cette conception de l’imaginaire social permet de penser l’identité culturelle et politique, mais non la constitution socio-historique des pratiques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".