MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790768218 · doi:10.1353/pgn.2017.0093

The Idea of a Moral Economy: Gerard of Siena on Usury, Restitution, and Prescription by Lawrin Armstrong

2017· article· en· W2790768218 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueParergon · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Economic and Legal Thought
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsuryRestitutionLawContext (archaeology)Argument (complex analysis)SociologyEconomicsLaw and economicsPhilosophyHistoryPolitical scienceTheologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Idea of a Moral Economy: Gerard of Siena on Usury, Restitution, and Prescription by Lawrin Armstrong Sybil M. Jack Armstrong, Lawrin, The Idea of a Moral Economy: Gerard of Siena on Usury, Restitution, and Prescription (Toronto Studies in Medieval Law), Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2016; cloth; pp. 344; R.R.P. CA $75.00; ISBN 9781442643222. This is a valuable transcription of the scarce manuscripts of Gerard of Siena's contributions to theological and legal debate about usury with a very acceptable straightforward, if not always totally precise, and intelligible translation of the original Latin. The structure of the volume makes the medieval approach to argument and its basic, unchallenged theories of natural law, positive law, canon and civil law clear. Given the massive historiography on medieval ideas about what we call (but they did not) the economy, original material added must be judged on the extent to which it adds to our understanding of both the medieval approach and its underlying beliefs. This work does both. Produced in the period of economic instability after the 2008 collapse it is also unexpectedly part of a current academic discussion on the problems of material inequality in which medieval ideas on the priority of the common good rather than private profit have developed an immediate relevance. Its brief introduction, which sets the context in which Gerard wrote and the works of those with whom he debated and who later maintained his argument, would serve as an excellent start for undergraduates confronting the issues and the period for the first time. The author establishes the confrontation of the ideas of the period and their opposition to modern theories, pointing out where the medieval imperative for social and political rights and their view of debt and the fictitious nature of 'money exchange' differ from current economic assumptions. Armstrong suggests that a reassessment of some of the arguments may provide a new perspective on present entrenched neoliberal orthodoxy about markets. To bring together in this way intellectual history and economic history is an admirable proposal and this translation a good point to start. [End Page 271] Sybil M. Jack The University of Sydney Copyright © 2017 Sybil M. Jack

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.263 · 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