Eunomia Et Le Droit Selon Allott (Eunomia and the Law According to Allott)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract En 1990, Philip Allott, professeur de droit a l’Universite Cambridge (Trinity), publie Eunomia: New Order for a New World. Dans la foulee de Hans Kelsen, Allott cherche a jeter les fondements theoriques du droit international (jus gentium): projet fort ambitieux qui exige necessairement l’enonce d’une vision globale et fonctionnelle du droit, stricto sensu, et des societes dans lesquelles il opere. Or, c’est dans l’espoir de faire connaitre la pensee rigoureuse et feconde de Philip Allott que le present article s’attarde a la description ontologique et axiologique du droit tel qu’expose dans Eunomia. Impossible de parler du droit international sans concevoir la societe des nations et leurs societes constitutives. De surcroit, il est impossible de concevoir une societe sans envisager ses atomes constitutifs, les etres humains, ou selon Allott, les consciences subjectives. Or, les consciences sont elles-memes des agregats de theories, de concepts, d’idees, et en amont, de mots. Pour Allott, une societe n’est rien d’autre qu’un ensemble de consciences subjectives, jouissant d’une existence et d’une evolution distincte de ses atomes constitutifs. Toute societe veut sa propre survie et son bien-etre : evolution spiralee qu’Allott nomme socialisation. Or, le droit, en tant que systeme normatif, est en effet l’acte de volonte des consciences humaines en vue d’assurer l’ordre et la transcendance des societes par la socialisation. Le droit active et stabilise la socialisation. Mais surtout, le droit demeure l’expression sociale du plus grand imperatif de la conscience humaine, a savoir l’amour. English Abstract: In 1990, Philip Allott, professor of law at the University of Cambridge (Trinity), published Eunomia : New Order for a New World. Through his book, like Hans Kelsen before him, Allott seeks to lay the theoretical foundations of international law (jus gentium): an ambitious undertaking which necessarily demands the formulation of a global and functional conception of the Law, strict sensu, and of the societies in which it operates. It is the goal of this article to share Philip Allott’s rigorous intellect and imaginative vision by canvassing the nature and purpose of the Law as described in Eunomia. It is impossible to discuss the nature of international law without first examining the society of nations and their constitutive societies. Furthermore, it is impossible to conceive human societies without first examining their constitutive part that is, human beings or, according to Allott, human consciousness. Consciousness is itself an aggregate of theories, concepts, ideas, and ultimately, words. For Allott, a society is nothing else but a gathering of consciousness, with an existence and evolution, distinct from that of its constitutive parts. Every society lives and seeks its own preservation and well-being through a process that Allott calls socialization. Law, as a normative structure system, is in fact the willing and acting of human consciousness with a view of ensuring social order and social transcendence through socialization. Law drives and stabilizes socialization. But above all, Law remains the social manifestation of human consciousness’ highest imperative: Love.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".