Bibliographic record
Abstract
Volotskoi’s ‘Marxist’ critique of Galtonian eugenics, his concept of ‘bio-social’ eugenics, and Florinskii’s ideas that underpinned them. This time, actively popularized by Volotskoi, Florinskii’s treatise proved influential in shaping discussions on the agendas and directions of eugenics and its ‘stepsister,’ genetics, in the Soviet Union, especially the heated debates over the possibility and necessity of creating a distinct ‘proletarian,’ ‘socialist,’ ‘bio-social’ eugenics. It also informed certain policies on marriage and family adopted by the Soviet authorities, including the promulgation of new laws on ‘the protection of health of prospective spouses and their progeny’ and the establishment of ‘marriage consultations.’ If Volotskoi and his like-minded colleagues did not succeed in creating ‘bio-social’ eugenics based on Florinskii’s ideas, it was certainly not for the lack of trying. But just four years after the republication of Florinskii’s treatise, in 1930 eugenics was condemned in the Soviet Union as a ‘bourgeois,’ ‘capitalist,’ ‘fascist’ doctrine. The Russian Eugenics Society dissolved and any references to Florinskii’s treatise vanished from the public scene. A peculiar amalgam of ideas, ideals, concerns, and practices embedded in the very notion of eugenics broke apart. In the next few years, the issues of ‘human perfection’ lost their ‘hereditary component’ and were relegated to the purview of social hygiene, physical and general education, psychology, and pedagogy. At the same time, the problems of ‘human degeneration’ were reduced to ‘hereditary diseases’ that became the subject of a new discipline—medical genetics—established and actively developed by several former members of the now defunct Russian Eugenics Society. During the Great Terror of the late 1930s, however, the institutional base of medical genetics was destroyed. A decade later, in 1948 the entire discipline of genetics was banned in the Soviet Union, as the result of a vicious campaign waged by the notorious agronomist Trofim Lysenko and endorsed personally by the ‘Great Teacher’ Joseph Stalin. In light of these events, it seemed that Florinskii’s treatise was destined to gather dust in some remote library storage forever. But Fate is a fickle mistress. Shortly after Stalin’s death, during the de-Stalinization campaign launched by his successor Nikita Khrushchev in the 1950s and popularly known as the Thaw, medical genetics re-emerged in the Soviet Union. A decade later, both Galton and eugenics were ‘rehabilitated,’ and with them Florinskii and his book re-entered Soviet discourse on human reproduction, heredity, variability, development, and evolution.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".