Bibliographic record
Abstract
what is a country for?"Charles Taylor asks the question and as a Canadian gives two answers.First: Canada is about "equality, nondiscrimination, the rule of law, [and] the mores of representative government."These are our political values, according to Taylor.Second, Canada is about "collective provision" and about "tolerance of rules and restrictions that are justified by the need for order."These are our social values.They are distinctive; they define us.Americans, says Taylor, are less likely to embrace "collective provision" and less willing to tolerate rules and restrictions.1 The description is familiar.Most Canadians, although not all, see their country in just these terms.Let me change the question.What did Canada's founders think a country is "for"?What did the Fathers of Confederation say?On the subject of political values, they see eye to eye with Taylor.A country should be about equality, nondiscrimination, the rule of law, and the mores of representative government.But they refused to define the new nation in terms of social values.British North America was home to people from different countries, with different backgrounds; there was no consensus on social values.The Fathers concluded that the attempt to write social values into the Constitution would offend some individuals, groups, and regions.It would breach the nondiscrimination principle.Consider the value that Taylor calls "collective provision."Some Canadians today favour big government and the welfare state; some
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.439 | 0.218 |
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".