Bibliographic record
Abstract
The late 17th C.-early 18th C. French aristocratic thinker Comte Henri de Boulainvilliers has emerged as a central figure in the historical narrative told by several contemporary political theorists regarding the origins and transformations of modern racism. This paper seeks to resituate Boulainvilliers, not only to demonstrate his importance historically, but also to illustrate the manner in which he has become the ground for conflicts of interpretation between competing contemporary accounts of racism derived from Foucauldian, Arendtian and liberal traditions. It is argued here that an historically-attentive reading of Boulainvilliers demonstrates certain inadequacies in several of these contemporary approaches on two main counts. First, historically, Boulainvilliers refutes any account that does not contextualize the emergence of race theories in the 18th and 19th centuries in relation to earlier discourses of European colonialism and; second, philosophically, he problematizes theories of racism that continue to take up the question in terms of a failure to properly universalize the category of the human with its attending rights and dignities within an ideal modern State form.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".