MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2219747479 · doi:10.3138/ecf.28.2.263

Everything is Lost in Amoranda’s Garden: Epistemology and Legitimacy in Mary Davys’s <i>The Reform’d Coquet</i>

2015· article· en· W2219747479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew Dicus

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligion, Gender, and Enlightenment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyNarrativeEpistemologyEnlightenmentPresuppositionSociologyEmpiricismSocial orderRationalismOrder (exchange)Closure (psychology)PoliticsPhilosophyAestheticsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mary Davys’s The Reform’d Coquet (1724) supplies two logics of social legitimacy. On its surface, it participates in familiar narrative conventions associated with masquerade fictions and marriage plots, subverting stable social norms and then resolving them through marriage. At a deeper level, it concerns itself with the epistemological presuppositions of legitimacy developed by political and philosophical discourses associated with the Enlightenment, especially in the social contract tradition. In this article, I argue for the centrality of Davys’s interest in the conceptual problems of legitimacy—problems that are only begged by the narrative closure of marriage and its implied restoration of gendered virtue. I demonstrate that the humanizing discourses of empiricism and rationalism are central to Davys’s construction of legitimacy, and I argue that Davys draws on such discourses in order to criticize and ironize the conventional resolution of narrative closure.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century FictionSame topicReligion, Gender, and EnlightenmentFrench-language works237,207