Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rousseau and the Problem of Political Speech articulates Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s understanding of the possibilities and limits of political speech through a focus on three lesser-known works that Rousseau planned to publish in a single volume: On Theatrical Imitation, the Essay on the Origin of Languages, and The Levite of Ephraim. The thesis begins by using the first two works to demonstrate why for Rousseau political speech and scientific speech tend to undermine one another, creating permanent limits to the degree of complex rationality available in political speech. An examination of Origin then shows the fundamental passions and symbols that can create social and political links. I argue that this analysis of passions and symbols in Origin is key to reading The Levite of Ephraim, where Rousseau shows how the fundamental passions, especially anger and compassion, are woven into a mix of stories, institutions and practices that maintain a common identity. Yet the final chapter shows that the increasing complexity of political life and language intensify the difficulties of creating such an identity, making Rousseau pessimistic about political success in the modern era. However, his analysis helps us to see the problems of our time more clearly even if his own rhetoric and strategies prove overly dangerous.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".