Diversité: Challenging or constituting laïcité?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The debates on laïcité in France have been capped by a claim that French cultural imaginary laïcité has reasserted itself against the ‘new challenge of diversity’, this new challenge explicitly being contrasted to the old challenge of the Catholic Church. There have been plenty of references to the French Third Republic during these debates, yet these references fail to recognise that in fact the concept of diversité was part of the discussions on laïcité during the Third Republic. This is a historical fact that questions the distinction between old and new challenges. This article locates the concept of diversité in the parliamentary deliberations during the making of the ‘Loi du 28 Mars 1882 sur l’enseignement primaire obligatoire’ and the ‘Loi du 9 Décembre 1905 concernant la séparation des églises et de l’État’ and then compares the relations of diversité and laïcité at that time with their relations in contemporary France. The article lays out the move of diversité from a constitutive premise of laïc institutions in the Third Republic to challenging laïcité, and it explores the politics behind this move. I argue that laïcité has not been reasserted but rather has regressed in France.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".