Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the history of philosophy, Baruch (later Benedict) Spinoza (b. 1632–d. 1677) is best known as one of the great rationalists of the seventeenth century, alongside René Descartes, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, and Nicolas Malebranche. As such, Spinoza is recognized for employing a priori metaphysical reasoning as the basis for a philosophical system that spans the gamut of traditional philosophical topics: God, metaphysics, natural philosophy, psychology, ethics, and politics. However, there is more to be said regarding Spinoza’s historical significance. Spinoza did more than perhaps any philosopher of the seventeenth century to advance revolutionary ideas that paved the way for the important collection of intellectual and social changes in the eighteenth century that are loosely described as the Enlightenment. These ideas include defenses of democracy, toleration, freedom of thought, and the secularization of philosophy, ethics, and natural science. Partly for this reason, Spinoza has also been an important subject for work in history, political theory, religious studies, and literary theory. Given the logistical constraints of this bibliographical entry, it will focus primarily on the large and growing body of work on Spinoza by philosophers, though important works from other disciplines will be mentioned as well. I will also concentrate on scholarship that introduces the central topics in the literature, though I will provide references to some of the more influential scholarship that is geared primarily toward specialists. I will also tend to focus on English-language scholarship, with a few notable exceptions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.037 |
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".