MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366809348 · doi:10.1353/rss.2017.0013

Preface to the French Edition

2017· article· en· W4366809348 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Bertrand Russell, Nicholas Griffin

Bibliographic record

VenueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGriffinClassicsPublicationHistoryArt historyPhilosophyLibrary scienceLawPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies n.s. 37 (summer 2017): 252–4 The Bertrand Russell Research Centre, McMaster U. issn 0036–01631; online 1913–8032 c:\users\ken\documents\type3701\red\rj 3701 132 red.docx 2017-08-18 10:38 PREFACE TO THE FRENCH EDITION1 Bertrand Russell Nicholas Griffin, Introduction Russell Research Centre / McMaster U. Hamilton, on, Canada l8s 4l6 ngriffin@mcmaster.ca n 1908 a French translation of Russell’s book on Leibniz was published for which Russell wrote a short preface, published here for the first time in English. Russell's early philosophical work initially attracted more professional attention in France than in England. An Essay on the Foundations of Geometry (1897) was widely reviewed and commented upon in France, and a French translation appeared in 1901. In this Russell had the enthusiastic help of Louis Couturat, who had energetically promoted Russell’s work on geometry and, later, on the principles of mathematics in France. But Couturat, rather surprisingly, does not seem to have played a role in having Russell’s book on Leibniz translated. The person who was instrumental in that was Lucien Lévy-Bruhl (1857–1939). It was he who persuaded French publisher , Félix Alcan, to publish an English translation of Russell’s book and who encouraged Jean Ray (1884–1943), then a student at the Sorbonne, to translate it. He also contributed a preface of his own to the work. Although Lévy-Bruhl is now bestknown for his work on the mentality of “primitive” peoples, he was at the time professor of the history of modern philosophy at the Sorbonne and had written a book on Comte and a history of philosophy in France, as well as L’Allemagne depuis Leibniz (1890). But as a historian of philosophy he fell very much on the historical side of the division between historical and philosophical histories of philosophy that Russell laid out in his preface to the English edition of the Leibniz book. Lévy-Bruhl had consistently argued that philosophical systems should not be studied in isolation from the social, political and intellectual milieu in which they arose, to some degree prefiguring his later socio-anthropological work on “primitive mentality”. All of which makes it the more surprising that he should have taken such an interest in Russell’s book, which places itself firmly on the other side. Russell himself seems to have been unclear about Lévy-Bruhl’s involvement for he asked Ray how he should acknowledge Lévy-Bruhl. In reply Ray provided the wording that Russell used. 1 [La Philosophie de Leibniz, exposé critique par Bertrand Russell, m.a.-f.r.s. Traduit de l’Anglais par Jean Ray and Renée Ray. Avec une Préface de l’Auteur et un AvantPropos par L. Lévy-Bruhl, Professor à la Sorbonne. Paris: Alcan. 1908. Pp. 4, xvi, 233. Reprinted Paris, London and New York: Gordon & Breach, 1970.] f= Preface to the French Edition 253 (Ray also asked Russell to acknowledge his wife as co-translator.) Russell did not take the opportunity the French edition afforded to make changes to the text, as he had done with the French translation of his Foundations of Geometry. His excuse, that he could not take the time away from “another task”, was legitimate enough: he was just beginning to prepare Principia Mathematica for the press. But, as became habitual with him when his book on Leibniz was discussed, he did mention Couturat’s two works on Leibniz which had appeared shortly after his own and which he regarded as confirming his main claim about the centrality of Leibniz’s logic to his philosophy but which, at the same time, led him to accept, what he had denied in his book, that for Leibniz all truths, including contingent ones, are analytic . This is the one substantive matter discussed in the French preface. It is explained in more detail in his review of Couturat’s La Logique de Leibniz (Papers 4: 24) and in the preface to the second English edition (1937) of A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz. No manuscript of the preface is known. he present...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3530.197

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell StudiesSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207