Bibliographic record
Abstract
Andreas Reckwitz and Hartmut Rosa are two prominent German sociological theorists, both in the their fifties, occupying key positions, often translated, and the winners of multiple prizes. Here, they describe, in turn, their positions and then debate each other in the final part of the book. The subtitle of the book underlines a shared claim, namely that sociologists must and can provide a general view of the state of society if the discipline is to continue to be taken seriously. It must be said immediately that the separate theories they offer are grand and abstract, seen in the fact that no country is mentioned, let alone discussed. Against this, however, can be set the remarkable and commendable clarity of exposition, making this a very useful introduction to one of the few the intellectual worlds not dominated by American social science. Reckwitz’s doctoral work was supervised in Cambridge by Anthony Giddens, as can be seen in the continual determination to avoid binaries of all sorts—something that leads to the advocacy of “practice theory,” a merging of cultural and material matters that leads to theory itself being seen as an active tool both in life and research. Still more important is the distinction between social theory and theory of society, the former providing concepts, the latter providing the general picture. The social theory of modernity for this author rests on radical contingency, the awareness that nothing is permanently fixed, but with movement resulting from two conflicts—between the general and the singular, and between rationality and cultural value. An extraordinary table then distinguishes between bourgeois modernity, industrial modernity, and late modernity, stressing the sources of novelty and experiences of loss. This is interesting, but there are problems with taken-for-granted views of historical development. Bourgeois modernity is held to have established parliamentary democracy, together with a nation state that encouraged imperialist expansion in the form of colonialism—a set of claims that simply falsifies the history of late nineteenth century Germany.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".