CANADIAN POLITICAL CULTURE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF THE CANADIAN PHILOSOPHER GEORGE. P. GRANT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article discusses contemporary approaches to the study of political culture in Russia and North America. The main theories of Canadian political culture's genesis in American and Canadian research are specified. The author analyzes Grant’s views on the development of Canadian political culture and their difference from the views of L. Hartz, S.M. Lipset, and I. McKay. The article presents the main ideas of Grant on Canadian nationalism, identity, nation and state's evolution, as well as perspectives of Canadian society in the second half of the 20 th century. Along with the American political scientist S.M. Lipset, who expressed his opinions about the differences between Canadian and American nations, Grant justified those differences in the context of historically determined British traditions in Canada and the objective biculturalism of the bilingual Canadian nation. During the crisis of Canadian liberal tradition, Grant expressed valuable thoughts about the technology's role in the life of contemporary society. The author criticizes his ideas about the Continentalism policy, which was actively developed in Canada after the Second World War. It is concluded that, in his works on the development of Canadian political culture, the evolution of Canadian culture, nation and state, J.P. Grant outstripped the ideas of his contemporaries – Canadian and American scholars, although he expressed many predictions in hyperbolic form.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".