Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of social work is currently wrestling with a number of divergent theories and concepts as it seeks to discover ways of thinking about social issues, client worlds, and best practices. Yet many of those eclectically gathered theories are not aligned logically or philosophically. This has led to a disjointed, ad hoc, and disunited theoretical basis within the field that has, arguably, weakened its collective effectiveness, reputation, and impact. Erich Fromm (1900-1980), a German-born psychoanalyst and philosopher, offers a number of theoretical ideas, stances, and directions that may improve social work’s theoretical underpinnings and perhaps even provide some foundational elements useful for the creation of a unified theory of human functioning in the world. This article explores Fromm’s body of work with the intention of applying a selection of his ideas to social work theory, policy, and practice. Remedies to resolve the bifurcation of psyche-based and society-based theories are discussed. Following this is a presentation of Fromm’s concept of “social character” as well as implications for social work practice.
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 | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".