MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175997900 · doi:10.51917/dialogo.2021.7.2.12

Henri-Dominique Lacordaire in the Canadian ultramontane philosophy

2021· article· en· W3175997900 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anastasiia Cherygova

Bibliographic record

VenueDialogo · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsOpposition (politics)AdmirationBourgeoisieSAINTReligious studiesSociologyOrder (exchange)LawPhilosophyPolitical scienceHistoryArt historyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the ultramontane bishop of Saint-Hyacinthe in Canada invited the French Dominicans to his diocese, he requested help from their leader, another French-speaking ultramontane, Reverend Father Henri-Dominique Lacordaire, O.P., who restored the Dominican Order in France after a long ban on religious orders. However, there seemed to have been a paradox at the heart of this invitation. Lacordaire was an extremely controversial figure in both secular and Catholic French circles, mostly due to his rocky relationships with the French episcopacy, his unconventional preaching style and especially his political opinions, including his admiration for republicanism and the Anglo-American political system. Theoretically, all this would put him at odds with Canadian ultramontanes. They were rather opposed to the growing politically liberal forces in Canada specifically and to the Anglo-American politico-philosophical system in general. So why would Canadian ultramontanes ask help from a man so seemingly different from them politically? Our hypothesis is that what united Lacordaire and Canadian ultramontanes was more significant than what divided them - notably, both parties were concerned about opposition to Catholicism coming from State officials, as well as about the menace of irreligion among the growing bourgeois class. Therefore, both were keenly interested in advancing the cause of Catholic education to combat these worries. To prove our hypothesis we would employ methodology based on personal writings and biographical accounts of actors involved in the arrival of Dominicans to Canada, as well as on historical analysis effectuated on connected topics, like the ultramontane scene in Canada, French missionary activity in North America, etc.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDialogoSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207