Social Morals, the Sacred and State Regulation in Durkheim’s Sociology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English Durkheim analysed the mechanisms and types of institutions that create organic solidarity and prevent it from imploding for lack of moral cement. In conformity with his life-long preoccupation with the origins and role of morals, he laid great emphasis on professional ethics and civic morals, together with the institutions—professional associations (“corporations”) and the state—that ought to ensure the maintenance of solidarity and avoid, or at least reduce, anomie. His considerations, explicitly or implicitly, involve the concept of the sacred, its relationship to “political society” and morality, authority, democracy, citizenship and “world patriotism”. French Durkheim analysait les mécanismes et types des institutions qui créent la solidarité organique et empêchent qu'elle n'implose à cause du manque de ciment moral. Conformément à sa préoccupation de toujours par rapport aux origines et au rôle des moeurs, il mettait en relation l'éthique professionnelle et les moeurs civiles avec les institutions -- associations civiles (``corporations'') et l'État -- qui doivent assurer le maintien de la solidarité et éviter, ou au moins réduire, l'anomie. Ses réflexions impliquent, explicitement ou implicitement, le concept du sacré, son rapport à la ``société politique'' et à la moralité, à l'autorité, à la démocratie, à la citoyenneté et au ``patriotisme mondial''.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it