MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387735195 · doi:10.32725/oph.2023.006

Was early modern natural law secularized? The current debates

2023· article· en· W4387735195 on OpenAlexaff
Ivo Cerman

Bibliographic record

VenueOpera Historica · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
Canadian institutionsCanadian Historical Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularizationNatural lawHumanismNatural (archaeology)LawTheocracyPhilosophyPolitical scienceSociologyHistoryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Even though the idea that there was a one-way secularization of natural law in 17th century has been abandoned, it is still possible to speak about an unintentional long-term secularization of legal thought. This is the position advanced recently by Knud Haakonssen. I argue here that this approach also requires a focus on specific classical works that had „secularizing effects“. The matter may be complicated by changes that a classical work underwent in re-editions during the author’s lifetime, or by reinterpretations of a classical work itself that may reveal previously unknown religious undertones. On the other hand, contextual or clandestine texts by the author should not be regarded as relevant, but merely as other religious interests displayed by the author during his lifetime. This review article surveys current valid secularization theories, and then focuses on the recent volume Sacred Polities, edited by Hans W. Blom (2022). It raises a new question about the parallel „Hebraist natural law“ which existed side by side with the post-Grotian „secular natural law“. Petrus Cunaeus’s De republica Hebraeorum of 1617, which coined the term „theocracy“, is especially important. The chapters on Humanist natural law before Grotius show that the Danish Lutheran Hemmingsen had used a deductive method long before Pufendorf and Wolff. Recent research on Catholic natural law has underlined that the Catholics made a significant contribution in their optimistic conception of rational human nature. This is partly reflected in Blom’s volume, which also explains why the Neapolitan school of natural law was interested in Grotius’s conception. Finally, the chapters on Pufendorf demarcate the limits of human agency vis-à-vis divine voluntarism, and then in terms of political coercion in matters of religion. New research has established that Pufendorf rejected coercion only in fundamental matters of revealed religion, but admitted the use of force in uncertain religious issues. It has also been proved that Pufendorf ’s natural law was not backed by God arbitrarily, but within the framework of a „hypothetical necessity“.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.012
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.207 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpera HistoricaSame topicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207