MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Writing and Evolutionary Theory

2019· reference-entry· en· W4244942742 on OpenAlexaff
Seán Hewitt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEvolution and Science Education
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDarwinismEpistemologyCreationismNatural selectionIntelligent designSociocultural evolutionHarmony (color)Evolutionary theoryVisionNatural (archaeology)SociologyFaithSocial sciencePhilosophyHistoryAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of evolutionary theory over the course of the 19th century was not confined to the theory of evolution by natural selection posited by Charles Darwin (b. 1809–d. 1882) and Alfred Russell Wallace (b. 1823–d. 1913). Encompassing the burgeoning science of geology, natural history, and biology and eventually being adapted into sociology, psychology, political theory, economics, and cultural anthropology, the theory of evolution quickly became both pervasive and divisive. Prior to Darwin’s intervention with the Origin of Species (1859), various theories of evolution were circulating, being accommodated within the field of natural theology or constituting a challenge to theories of intelligent design. Over the period, the interplay between literature and evolutionary theory was complex and pronounced: advances in science provoked new formal and thematic concerns for writers, and scientists used poetry and literary techniques to disseminate their arguments to wide readerships. During the period, the rise of natural historical study as a popular pursuit, and the Victorian emphasis on nature study as a moral, even religious, pursuit, meant that evolutionary ideas were adapted for various purposes and contested in both popular and specialist texts. Pre-Darwinian literature circulated evolutionary ideas mainly within the framework of natural theology (proving and discussing God’s existence through the study of Creation), but visions of harmony and beneficent design were challenged through the theory of natural selection, meaning that post-Darwinian literature more fully encompasses anthropological anxiety and the falling off of faith. Religious texts, and theological concerns, are thus central to the interplay between literature and science in the period. Toward the end of the century, the adaptation of Darwinism and evolutionary theory into various disciplines saw a proliferation of social Darwinism, branching off into eugenics, the impact of which would be felt most fully in the 20th century. This article focuses on writing and evolutionary theory in its immediate British and 19th-century contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.020
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.006

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolution and Science EducationFrench-language works237,207