Imagination et individuation dans la philosophie de Spinoza : La science intuitive comme imagination libérée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La philosophie de Spinoza cherche à concilier et réunir trois horizons philosophiques fondamentaux : l’émanation néo-platonicienne (l’expression), le mécanisme cartésien (cause efficiente), et les catégories aristotéliciennes (Substance, attribut, mode). Ce premier point est pris pour acquis. Nous expliquerons que cette tentative sera rendue possible grâce à la conception nouvelle, au 17e siècle, de l’actualité de l’infini. Nous examinerons ensuite les conséquences de cette nouvelle interprétation, qui permet de rendre l’individu transparent à lui-même sur un plan d’immanence, expressif par rapport à une éminence qui le diffuse, mais déterminé dans une substantialité fictive entre objets finis. En proposant le pouvoir de l’imagination et des prophètes comme point de départ et principe actif du conatus, nous montrerons que la distinction, chez Spinoza, demeure toujours une fiction. Pour conclure, nous serons en mesure de signaler en quoi le Zarathoustra de Nietzsche relève d’une volonté de poursuivre le travail entrepris par Spinoza.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".