Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the beginning of sociology it was a philosophy for promoting the Good society. Sociology was what we in Feuerbach’s terms may call a “philosophy of the future”. The German enlightenment is crucial if one wants to go beyond: create an alternative to today’s sociology. Kant’s notion of experience bridges the abyss created by the empiricists and rationalists by placing knowledge in man. Sociology is very much a heritage of the French Enlightenment, Auguste Comte (1798-1857) and Emile Durkhein (1858-1917). They thought of themselves as positivists, i.e., as doing something “objective”. At the same time as heirs of the ideas of Enlightenment they wanted sociology to be used in order to improve society, to create a Good society. Comte had a view of this whole – society - in terms of Man. Lost in Durkheim is this idea of man developing in and through society, reflecting a change in the social context, in the development of the capitalist society. After the death of Durkheim in 1917 sociology holds a marginal position in the French society but then in the late 1940’s it rises again and in this new sociology American sociology was dominating, becoming an applied science. Today sociology continues this empiricist tradition. It is claimed that society has become something out-of-control. Instead we should follow its French and German roots. Understanding society as a reflection of ourselves, of man is what we need in order to create a Good society for everyone, this also should be the first principle of sociology as the philosophy of the future.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".