Racionalismo, ceticismo e a coerência do Commentaire Philosophique de Bayle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O Commentaire philosophique (CP) de Pierre Bayle, de 1686-88, é amplamente reconhecido como um dos primeiros e mais radicais apelos à tolerância religiosa universal no Ocidente (Zagorin 2003, 240-88). Tem também a reputação de ser um texto notoriamente difícil de interpretar. A principal questão interpretativa do CP é que a segunda parte (CP II) parece minar totalmente a primeira parte (CP I): o que começa como a obra de um Racionalista parece terminar como a obra de um Cético. Depois de demonstrar a imoralidade da perseguição, a obra prossegue para demonstrar que qualquer pessoa que esteja sinceramente convencida de que deve perseguir tem, de facto, a obrigação moral de perseguir. O artigo explora duas abordagens que visam dar conta dos paradoxos interpretativos presentes neste texto de Bayle, defendendo uma posição intermediária entre as leituras Paradoxal e Coerente.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".