Wordsworth against the Capitalist Ideology of Labor in “The Last of the Flock” and “Simon Lee”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In several places in the Lyrical Ballads William Wordsworth challenges the capitalist ideology of labor. In Wordsworth’s view one of the key weaknesses the way this ideology manifests itself in economic thought is the way it generalizes about different people and their situations. The result of such generalizations is that they miss out the different meanings people give to their economic activity and applies to them a crude classification of either rational or irrational. Wordsworth believed that this erroneous economic thinking had infected moral theory. In the Lyrical Ballads Wordsworth investigates specific instances of people for whom capitalist economic imperatives no longer make sense. The implication of these instances is that these people are being marginalized by their failure to be assimilated to alienated labor. They either fail to adapt to alienated labor or adapt to it for motives other than those prescribed by the capitalist ideology of labor. This article will show how “The Last of the Flock” gives an instance of the former kind and “Simon Lee” gives an instance of the latter. In the Lyrical Ballads morality critiques economic thought. Wordsworth uses poetry to reaffirm the authority of moral thought to inform economic thought. This is an act of rebellion against the tendency he saw in his times of economic thought to stand above moral thought.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".