MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065575949 · doi:10.7202/203185ar

Le concept de démocratie dans la critique du droit politique hégélien

2007· article· fr· W2065575949 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurent-Paul Luc

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanitiesLienHegelianismPolitical scienceLawEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans sa Critique du droit politique hégélien (Kritik des Hegelschen Staatsrechts), Marx est guidé par la démarche génético-critique de Feuerbach à qui il emprunte une logique de la transposition analogique. Il s'efforce d'y circonscrire « Vidée spécifique de la constitution politique » à travers une lecture minutieuse et patiente des paragraphes 261-313 des Grandes Lignes de la Philosophie du Droit (Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts) de Hegel à qui il reproche d'insérer le politique dans une structure présupposée : « Hegel donne à sa logique un corps politique; il ne donne pas la logique du corps politique ». En récusant la réponse — « non-critique et mystique » — que Hegel donne à son étude — « lucide » — de la modernité et en introduisant le concept de démocratie — « énigme résolue de toutes les constitutions » — comme inversion du concept hégélien de l'État, la Critique ne nous semble pas parvenir même dans sa timide proclamation de la disparition de l'État à signer une rupture avec Hegel. Hypercritique vis-à-vis Hegel, l'herméneutique marxienne mise en oeuvre dans la Critique partage naïvement les postulats hégéliens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.026
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political TheoryFrench-language works237,207