MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117191932 · doi:10.1177/1468795x09102123

Max Weber's Sociology of Law

2009· article· en· W2117191932 on OpenAlexaff
Isher‐Paul Sahni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Classical Sociology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyDiscernmentRationalization (economics)LawBureaucracyCasuistrySociology of lawEconomic JusticeEpistemologySocial sciencePhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The substantive underpinnings of Max Weber's `Sociology of Law' and the standing of judges therein are discussed. Foregrounding his conception of the administration of justice, perennial concern with the correlation between personality and the structure of domination, and account of legal rationalization, his discernment of the vital adjudicative role assumed by judges and the bearing of their personal qualifications is elucidated. The focus is placed on Weber's putatively negative assessment of the Common Law. Reading his appraisal of precedent and the charismatic stature of the judge in light of his theory of casuistry and critique of bureaucracy, it is shown that his examination implicitly extols the English administration of justice.

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 categoriesScience 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Classical SociologySame topicJudicial and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207