Can the 'debased people' reform themselves? A re-examination of the political thought of C.B. Macpherson
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Can the ‘debased people’ reform themselves? A re-examination of the political thought of C.B. Macpherson Paul Kellogg Assistant Professor, Athabasca University Master of Arts, Integrated Studies Program Athabasca, AB Canada T9S 3A3 August 2010 DRAFT ONLY Not for quotation without permission of the author This paper was prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, September 2-5, 2010. For stimulating my interest in Macpherson, and introducing me many years ago, to that wing of the liberal tradition focused on human agency, this paper owes a considerable debt to the late Professor Virginia Macdonald of the Atkinson Faculty of Liberal & Professional Studies, York University, Toronto, Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".