Auguste Comte and historical epistemology: a reply to
Bibliographic record
Abstract
peculiar review practice. Suppose a Finnish historian from Helsinki publishes a book on Spain. Some years later the English translation appears and an international journal publishes an extensive review written by... a Finnish historian from Helsinki. That is the case here, except that Pels and I are Dutch sociologists from Amsterdam while the book in question is about French social science. Isn’t cross-disciplinary and transnational reviewing somewhat more fruitful than local dispute? The Rise of Social Theory offers a reconstruction of the emergence of social theory in the Enlightenment, of the scientization of this new intellectual genre during the last quarter of the 18th century and the Napoleonic era, and concludes with a last part about Auguste Comte and the formation of sociology. Written from the perspective of historical sociology, it consistently tries to combine social and intellectual history. The early development of social theory is thus connected to major transformations of the French intellectual field, involving literary as well as scientific developments from the Enlightenment to the age of Romanticism.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".