What we have yet failed to achieve: a study of Charles Taylor's Canadian social criticism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation examines what the author calls the Canadian social criticism component of the work of philosopher Charles Taylor. An internationally renowned scholar, Taylor's work has been much commented on. Yet there is an imbalance of attention in the reception of his work between the ample commentary pertaining to his more abstract philosophical thought, on the one hand, and the paucity of commentary concerning those aspects of his writing that carry more immediate practical relevance, i.e. his work in social criticism. After introducing a basic framework for 'interpretive social criticism', the dissertation proceeds to situate different aspects of Taylor's criticism within contemporary debates, including the topic areas of democratic decline, consumerism, national unity and egalitarian politics. At one level, each of the different chapters engages with and elaborates on a facet of Canada's common public culture. Yet the central objective in bringing them together in a single program of research is to contribute to our understanding of how this still incomplete culture and political identity can best be achieved. The guiding assumption behind the research is that this would require being faithful at once to the country's social democratic tradition and to its unique potential in reconciling ethnocultural, regional and linguistic diversity. The work of Charles Taylor, as interpreted in the following chapters, helps to demonstrate what this means in the context of specific issues and debates.
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 | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.087 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".