Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise of an inquiring frame of mind, critical of different forms of orthodox thought, was one of the most important characteristics of the nineteenth century.This book examines the course of critical inquiry and its relationship to the assertion of moral authority in the thought of some of the major figures in Englishspeaking Canada's intellectual life for the period before the First World War.Caught historically be tween a British heritage, which many of them conceived to contain the best elements of Western civilization, and an American neighbour, which advanced ineluctably towards modernity in its modes of thought and action, Anglo-Canadians in the Victorian era sought to establish and to preserve in Canada a broad moral code that would constitute the core of a way of life reconciling belief and inquiry, tradition and innovation, concern and freedom.For some of them, critical inquiry was a serious threat to the social bond; others came to see in the very process of inquiry a means of preserving it in the modern age.The central theme of this book is the interplay between critical inquiry and moral affirmation within the Anglo-Canadian mind.It is suggested that a central and continuous element of Anglo-Canadian intellectual life-so much so as to constitute a virtual imperative-has been its moral dimension.The term "moral," it should be noted, is used here in a broad sense.Edmund Burke had used the phrase "moral imagination" to suggest man's general power of ethical perception, his aspiration to establish and to maintain right order both in the commonwealth and in the soul.This notion is paralleled in Northrop Fryets use of the term "concern," by which he means "something which includes the sense of the importance of preserving the integrity of the total human community.""It is clear," he goes on to say (in his essay "The Knowledge of Good and Evil"), "that concern and morality are closely connected: morality, in fact, in the sense of the kind of ob-
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.600 | 0.377 |
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".