Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the end of the Second World War, Fromm was a well-known social scientist, psychoanalyst and social critic living in New York City poised to become the most influential public sociologist of his time. Financially secure and no longer constrained by his connection to the Frankfurt School network or to orthodox Freudian sponsorship and institutions, Fromm was well positioned to take his social theory and sociology directly to the public. Fromm was connected to top commercial press editors in New York, their respect earned from the success of Escape from Freedom . Able to write clearly and quickly in English, Fromm entered the period of the height of his fame and influence throughout his forties, fifties, and early sixties. There was a brief moment in the wake of Escape from Freedom 's critical success where Fromm had an opportunity to gain influence inside professional sociology in the United States. Fromm rejected a sustained engagement with the discipline, preferring to write books to mass audiences. Best-selling books from Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics (1947), Psychoanalysis and Religion (1950), The Sane Society (1955a), and The Art of Loving (1956a) made Fromm the most visible and important popularizer of the ideas of both Freud and Marx in America in the Cold War era. Fromm had moved from the role of empirical researcher to social critic and public sociologist. Fromm interpreted, popularized, and revised Marx, Freud and the broader European intellectual tradition for Americans in an age of the paperback, mass conformity, and anti-communism. No simplistic popularizer, Fromm outlined a powerful public sociological critique of American capitalism, culture, and militaristic foreign policy. Fromm would shape the politics of the 1960s era in profound ways (Jamison and Eyerman, 1994). Fromm was doing a kind of sociology but one that was in accordance with his ‘intellectual self-concept’ (Gross, 2013). Fromm's ideas were important, but he also provided the single most influential role model – indeed a template – for the public sociologist of the 1950s and 1960s, both for the broader public but also for the sociology profession 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".