MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087059727 · doi:10.7202/203319ar

La critique des anthropologies et le Discours sur l’inégalité de J.J. Rousseau

2006· article· fr· W2087059727 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vinh-De Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEuropean Political History Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude se veut le commentaire de la proposition qui ouvre la Préface du Discours sur l'Inégalité de Rousseau : « La plus utile et la moins avancée de toutes les connaissances humaines me paraît être celle de l'homme. » Elle tente d'expliquer, du point de vue de Rousseau, le retard de la connaissance anthropologique par rapport aux autres branches du savoir, en analysant la critique faite par ce dernier à l'endroit des anthropologies marquantes de l'époque : celles du Christianisme, de Thomas Hobbes et de Buffon. L'analyse laisse entrevoir que la Bonté naturelle et la Liberté constituent le double principe fondamental de la conception rousseauiste de l'homme, montrant du même coup que le Discours sur l'Inégalité, en tant que discours anthropologique, est une tentative de démonstration de ce principe.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
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 score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicEuropean Political History AnalysisFrench-language works237,207