Medicine, Morality, Madness: Competing Models of Insanity in Calderón's "El mayor monstruo del mundo"
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A trav?s de una lectura de El mayor monstruo del mundo (1637) de Calder?n de la Barca propongo explicar c?mo en Espa?a ?l acercamiento pernicioso a la locu ra no es resultado de una progresi?n hacia el pensamiento racionalista tal como arguye Foucault sino de un retorno a un modo de pensar arraigado en la su perstici?n. As?, sin negar la teor?a propuesta en la conocida Historia de la locura en la ?poca cl?sica (1961), pretendo mostrar c?mo el fil?sofo franc?s no presta su ficiente atenci?n a la naturaleza din?mica de la concepci?n de la locura en la mo dernidad temprana, y as? cuestiono la validez general de su paradigma en su aplicaci?n a la Espa?a de los siglos XVI y xvii. El texto calderoniano yuxtapone dos versiones de la locura: la de Herodes, que se basa en ideas moralizantes y reli giosas, y la del gracioso Malacuca, que se desarrolla de modo m?dico-cient?fico. Ambas locuras en el texto corresponden a un tratamiento gen?rico dado: mien tras esta es c?mica, aquella es tr?gica. El cotejo de estos dos acercamientos a la locura demuestra c?mo el texto se nutre de referencias tanto m?dicas como teo l?gicas para acabar favoreciendo, al contrario de lo que supone Foucault, la se gunda en detrimento de la primera.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it