MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289552789

The Colonial Science in the Crossroads of Modernity: Reception of Science in Nineteenth Century Bengal

2012· article· en· W2289552789 on OpenAlexaff
Avishek Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian History and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernityEmpiricismEnlightenmentColonialismHuman scienceContext (archaeology)PositivismNatural scienceNatural (archaeology)Science studiesSociologySocial scienceEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyHistoryPhilosophyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the 'increasing formalization of knowledge,' ‘modern’ education/pedagogy inherited a separation between the study of ‘natural worlds’ (material/biotic) and the ‘world of humans.’ As a result, natural sciences (study of natural worlds) and humanities/social sciences (study of human worlds) have developed as two insulated and divorced bodies of knowledge. This paper argues that this natural/human science binary is typical product of Rationalist western modernity and has no resonance whatsoever in context to 'pre-modern' India. The paper shows how this separation instituted during the Enlightenment was readily adopted in colonial Bengal within historical milieu that fueled interest in positivist-empiricist science.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicIndian History and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207