Влияние социальной активности на функционирование политической системы: различия между клановым исламским и западным индивидуалистическим обществами
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article the mechanism of influence of social activity on process of functioning of political system is considered. Within the limits of the structural functionalism comparison of concepts «political regime» and «political system» is undertaken. Building upon the L.N.Gumilev’s concept of passionarity, dependence of political regime type on level of social activity of a society is investigated. The main aim of this work is to discover why introduction of western political practices into the conditions of clan Islamic societies is ineffective. The scientific novelty of the present work lies in the construction of models representing political system adaptations, caused by dynamic changes of social environment, in conditions of both individualistic and clan societies. As a result of this research there was developed a new typology of political regimes, which takes into account the specifics of clan and individulistic societies’ social structure. There also was made a conclusion about existence of social filters at “inputs” and “outputs” of political system in the social environment of clan societies. The role of filter is performed by clan, as a social institution that accumulates and transforms the demands of single individuals. Thus, the political institutions borrowed from individualistc societies will appear in an alien environment and will be unable to perform their functions effectively.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.005 |
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".