L’anthropologie de la reconnaissance de Marcel Hénaff et la question du symbolisme : sur la pertinence de relire Mauss après Lévi-Strauss
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La fécondité de l’œuvre de Marcel Hénaff (1942–2018) pour penser les sociétés occidentales modernes et ce qu’elles deviennent reste encore à apprécier. Sous la diversité des thèmes qu’elle aborde se cache une pensée d’une grande cohérence – Le prix de la vérité. Le don, l’argent, la philosophie (2002) en est le meilleur exemple. Cette pensée qui est inspirée de l'anthropologie sociale et culturelle, de la phénoménologie et, par moments, de la théologie chrétienne, doit sa forme au regard généalogique qu’elle mobilise. Mais c’est par rapport au religieux tel qu’il a été pensé dans l’école française de sociologie et d’anthropologie qu’il faut la situer pour en saisir toute la cohérence. Car c’est la question du symbolisme telle qu’elle se présente chez Claude Lévi-Strauss qui a propulsé la pensée d’Hénaff et l’a conduite à « réactiver » l’héritage de Marcel Mauss sur le don réciproque cérémoniel, de manière à développer sa propre anthropologie de la reconnaissance.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".