Bibliographic record
Abstract
Talcott Parsons et Norbert Elias ont tous deux abordé la sociologie après avoir fait des études en philosophie et en médecine. Arrivés à Heidelberg à peu près au même moment, ils ont fréquenté les mêmes cercles sans jamais, semble-t-il, se rencontrer. Si leurs principaux ouvrages ont à première vue un cadre extrêmement différent, comme le montre à l'origine The Structure of Social Action et Über den Prozess der Zivilisation, les préoccupations théoriques sous-jacentes se chevauchent cependant. Le fait qu'Elias se soit rebellé contre la tradition kantienne et que Parsons y soit demeuré fondamentalement fidèle peut expliquer leur approche différente. Cet article brosse une esquisse de leur théorie respective de la connaissance, de leurs idées au sujet de la formation des concepts et des théories, ainsi que de leur utilisation distincte de la théorie freudienne. Il ne traite pas, toutefois, de leur théorie respective du développement des sociétés humaines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.006 |
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".