Deep diversity versus constitutional patriotism
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
In discussing Canada, many analysts argue that if the country is to be kept together, it is necessary to revise the standard liberal conception of citizenship. The essential problem currently facing Canada, they claim, is how diverse claims for difference can be accommodated. This article is intended to shed light on this debate by contrasting Charles Taylor's concept of ‘deep diversity’ with Jürgen Habermas's notion of ‘constitutional patriotism’. The purpose of the article is twofold. First, I seek to clarify the salience of the terms ‘deep diversity’ and ‘constitutional patriotism’, by locating each term in the relevant author's larger philosophical framework and by discussing their relevance to the case of Canada. Second, I use the two terms as the basis for a discussion of what precisely constitutes the nature of the problems facing Canada. Taylor and Habermas offer different diagnoses in this respect. The article concludes that Habermas's diagnosis is not only more positive but also points us in a different direction than Taylor in our search for solutions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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