MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168580933 · doi:10.1177/1468795x04040650

Use Value and Substantive Rationality in the Work of Marx and Weber

2004· article· en· W2168580933 on OpenAlex
H. T. Wilson

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Classical Sociology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWeber, Simmel, Sociological Theory
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDichotomyRationalityEpistemologySociologyValue (mathematics)Function (biology)CapitalismPositive economicsPhilosophyLawEconomicsPolitical sciencePoliticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two particularly important dichotomies for anyone studying modern social theory are Marx’s distinction between use values and exchange values and Weber’s distinction between substantive and formal rationality. Indeed, it might be argued that in these dichotomies lies a basis for understanding core elements of several of their most central arguments concerning capitalism as one of the three or four key institutions of/in modernity. In this article, I want not only to discuss the functions performed by these dichotomies in their respective theoretical structures, but also to indicate some later instances of parallel forms of thinking. My aim here is to address both the central role of dichotomies and dichotomization, and some important differences in the ways they are deployed in and/or function as theoretical strategies.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.280 · 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