Bibliographic record
Abstract
full century before the revolutions of emancipation in Europe JLXand in North America, Baruch Spinoza published his Theological-Political Treatise (the TTP) in 1670, arguing that the best civilized society is one in which religion and state are not coequal.Spinoza's sophisticated critique of then-contemporary models of structuring society was received as "harmful and vile," "subversive," and "blasphemous."(Spinoza 2001, vii-hereafter "S").However dangerous it may have been perceived, Spinoza's seemingly prescient work anticipated 18th century struggles to create more ordered, free and reasonable civilizations.Perhaps his work prior to emancipation can help us further understand and possibly liberate ourselves from our modern conflicts between religion and state.Spinoza identifies religion and state as two humanly-constructed social organizing mechanisms.Both mechanisms induce obedience to manage tensions between personal pursuits and collective preservation.It is Spinoza's treatment of the role obedience plays in ordering society that this essay explores.A close reading of the TTP reveals that Spinoza analyzes religion and state along a particular-universal axis, and thus he addresses four social organizing mechanisms.These are: in the religion arena, the particular religion is Judaism and the universal is his conceptualization of an ideal catholic faith; in the political arena, the particular governing structure is theocracy and the universal is an idealized democracy.Contemporary scholarship on obedience in the TTP rarely distinguishes religious obedience from state obedience, a gloss that unfortunately elides differences between these two overarching mechanisms (e.g.,
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".