MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2194608983 · doi:10.4000/communication.5527

Points de vue conceptuel et politique chez Habermas

2002· article· fr· W2194608983 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Theory and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyPolitical scienceHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Puisque le projet de Habermas est de concilier un point de vue conceptuel et un point de vue politico-normatif, il est légitime de vérifier si ces deux points de vue coïncident. Dans cette perspective, on peut montrer que, quand Habermas analyse la crise de l’État-nation, le modèle conceptuel binaire — système/monde vécu — glisse vers un modèle ternaire — sphère économique autonome et dépolitisée, État-social-démocratique et espace contestataire. Ce déplacement et les difficultés qu’il entraîne proviennent notamment de l’idée que chaque sphère de la société est censée être intégrée par un medium unique (monnaie ou pouvoir ou discussion). Une telle position s’avère formellement intenable. En s’appuyant sur Habermas lui-même, il est possible de dépasser le principe d’intégration pour adopter celui de dissension coordonnée des rapports sociaux.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.279 · 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