Shocked Sensibility: The Nerves, the Will, and Altered States in Sade’s <i>L’Histoire de Juliette</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Marquis de Sade modified his early ideas about sensibility in his post-revolutionary writings, especially in L’Histoire de Juliette (1799–1801). Throughout L’Histoire de Juliette, Sade’s characters discover that the power of the will—le moral—can master the physical world of sensation. To achieve this state, however, they must first understand the working of the sensory apparatus itself. By using this biomedical knowledge, Sade’s libertines could unleash their inner drives and push themselves into transcendent forms of experience. Sade’s method had two components: first, libertines must repress their sensibility in all its moral and physical dimensions in order to unleash its full power. Second, libertines learned to shock their nerves through extreme sensory experiences and thus overwhelm ingrained moral values and behaviour. Taken together, these experiential techniques potentially released the libertine’s creative mind. In this process, the libertine transcended the conventions of aesthetic mimesis, by substituting expressivity for reality itself.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".