Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé: Published in 2024, this book is one among a series of current reappraisals concerning the Enlightenment (Antoine Lilti or Robert Darnton, for instance) to question the impact of the philosophers and authors of the Encyclopédie, their ideas of universalism and how much their novel ideas contributed to the advent of the 1789 French revolution. Gerhardt Stenger offers an elegant and lively portrait of the encyclopedists, their personal and financial situations, and their motives for their participating in the translation of Chambers. He addresses the questions of universalism (and perhaps tenets of decolonization) from the historical frame of the advent of the Enlightenment, as centered on the epic developments and battles of l’Encyclopédie. As well, through Diderot’s alliances, his mails to his mistress, his strategies, we gain an intimate portrait of the man and his emotions regarding his engagement in the encyclopedic project. Stenger’s book is at once intensely scholarly and eminently accessible, in fact a great teaching tool for graduates and undergraduate students alike. Rousseau’s interferences will be at once more shocking, and yet intelligent and reasonable. Stenger discusses carefully selected encyclopedic articles representative of nodal disputes, such as the respective and conception of “citizen” (Diderot versus Rousseau), leading to a citizenship of rights (human rights eventually) as well as duties. For sure you will also laugh at the depiction of Diderot and d’Alembert occasional disputes. Stenger tells us about this adventure in such a way that we perceive what life possibly entailed in terms of writing and publishing, the compulsory homage to religion and power, and as well, how ministers, playwriters, powerful encyclopedic allies and enemies shaped the volumes or simply protected and championed them or failed one way or the other.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.151 | 0.102 |
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".