Bibliographic record
Abstract
Looks at the roles various world views have played in generating cultural policies at various times in Western history. Evan Alderson’s introduction places the work within its social, political and historical framework. Robin Blaser addresses the problem of how we can begin to locate a responsible cultural position at the present time. The volume’s historical progression begins with John Humphrey looking at the relation of arts and state in Imperial Rome. Haijo Westra focusses on the relation of language and culture in the medieval world. Jonathan Bordo examines the emergence of the individually framed picture in the Renaissance. Steven Cole examines the artistic autonomy of English Romanticism. Hazard Adams outlines a conception of cultural policy through William Blake. Cultural policy is brought closer to the Canadian context with Gordon Fearn’s discussion of communications policy in Canada. Anthony Welch takes up the process of re-comprehending culture within the revolution of communications by examining revolutionary and pre-revolutionary Iran. The two final essays take up the challenge of positing the hope of the post-modern. Barry Cooper begins his examination of the relevant part of post-modernism in the sixth century A.D. Robert Kroetsch sees only a longing for order that must be abandoned so that we may measure the depth of our uncertainties and learn to converse across them. Robin Blaser reminds us in his “Afterthoughts” that much of our current unease stems, not from too many differences, but from too few. This volume speaks in a single voice both to those interested in the pragmatics of current cultural policy and to those whose primary allegiance is to the life of the imagination. It is not just a scholarly exercise, but also a call for action — to a more comprehensive and informed engagement with our present cultural condition.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".