Capitalism, Democracy, and the Epistemocratic Alternative in 20th Century Intellectual Culture: Studies in the Ideal Reconciliation of Systemic Contradictions, 1919-1940
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis engages whether the bearing of intellectuals in liberal democracies toward citizens retains the stereotyped blend of hauteur and trepidation identified by some historians, and proposes "epistemocracy" as an idiom by which to encapsulate a political vision associated with swathes of the intelligentsia as it has evolved since its purported inception.It is further suggested that during crises, epistemocrats spearhead initiatives described as "returns of the political," the objective of which is to reassert control of two major cloacae of epistemic pollution: the masses and the market, both of which contest the primacy of intellectuals and the desirability of their projects.Between an examination of how epistemocracy has been conceptualized and some theoretical material that may potentially be synthesized to produce an original variation of epistemocracy sits an examination of five texts by interwar intellectuals designed to illustrate the heterogeneity and cohesion of this conceit.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".