L'Héritage du christianisme en France 1750-1848
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the Enlightenment to the Romantic period, many writers transformed Christianity into a religion of temporal salvation. Whether they manifest, in their writings, a will to destroy it (Voltaire, Helvetius, d'Holbach, etc.) or to surpass it (Leroux, Lamennais, Hugo, etc.), all refer to its dogmas as a paradigm of argumentation from which they suggest a new explanation of the world and, most important, they all propose a transformation of the society. The goal of my thesis is to offer a new analysis of this period that spreads from 1750 to 1848. In my hypothesis, I stipulate that before 1789, the philosophers of the Enlightenment never undertook a real "de-Christianisation" and that at the turn of the century, the writers did not return exactly to Christianity. Far from taking the position that the argumentation had transformed itself in a manner that radically differed during this historical period that preceded and followed the French Revolution, my goal is to show that a same will to ameliorate the human condition on earth was manifested in comparable ways throughout these different discourses. The thought of these authors is rather a testimony of a new "sacralisation" of which finality is now on a temporal level: sin is not necessary and, more importantly, it is possible to abolish it through social reformations. This desire of a better world is the most important message that Christianity passed on to the thinkers of this period. By viewing human existence in this way, modernity could be defined not as the end, but rather as the inheritance of Christianity or, to say it all, as its humanization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".