Enthusiasm as an epistemic virtue in British scientific culture in the second half of the 18th century and the first quarter of the 19th century (illustrated in the works of naturalist J. Banks)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Статья посвящена конфликтной природе эпистемических добродетелей в представлении британских ученых-естествоиспытателей во второй половине XVIII — первой четверти XIX века, периоде, на который приходится так называемая «эра Бэнкса» (1778–1820), получившая название по имени президента Лондонского королевского общества, натуралиста Джозефа Бэнкса. Какие ценности определяли формирование личности Бэнкса? Какая эпистемическая стратегия позволила ему стать на более чем четыре десятилетия ответственным за выбор вектора развития интеллектуальной и академической жизни Британской империи? Задаваясь этими вопросами и анализируя профессиональную траекторию и способы коммуникации Дж. Бэнкса с другими учеными, автор статьи приходит к выводу о решающей роли энтузиазма в жизни Бэнкса и его современников. Статья содержит обстоятельный обзор биографических работ о Дж. Бэнксе, краткий экскурс в историю эпистемологии добродетелей и энтузиазма как эпистемического феномена, сравнительную характеристику взаимоотношений Бэнкса с двумя его ассистентами — Чарльзом Благденом и Гемфри Дэви, а также французскими натуралистами Жаком-Жюльеном Лабиллардьером и Деода Доломье. Автор рассуждает о специфике исследования внутренней мотивации ученых и предлагает собственный проект реконструкции социальной сети ученых и интеллектуалов, объединенных Бэнксом благодаря неординарной степени личного энтузиазма. The article is devoted to the conflicting nature of epistemic virtues as viewed by British scientists in the second half of the 18th century and the first quarter of the 19thcentury, the period when “Banks’ era” failed (1778–1820, named after the president of the Royal Society of London, the naturalist Joseph Banks). What values determined the formation of Banks’ personality? What epistemic strategy allowed him to choose the vector of development of intellectual and academic life of the British Empire for more than four decades? Asking these questions and analyzing the professional trajectory and ways of communication of J. Banks with other scientists, the author of the article comes to the conclusion about the decisive role of enthusiasm in the life of Banks and of his contemporaries. The article contains a detailed review of biographical works about J. Banks, a brief excursion into the history of epistemology of virtues and enthusiasm as an epistemic phenomenon, and a comparative description of the relationship between Banks and his two assistants (Charles Blagden and Humphrey Davy, as well as French naturalists Jacques-Julien Labillardière and Déodat de Dolomieu). The author discusses the specifics of the study of the intrinsic motivation of these scientists and proposes a new project for reconstruction of the social network of the scientists and intellectuals united by Banks, thanks to his extraordinary personal enthusiasm.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".