{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0202991452991453, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010683760683760685, 'mean_word_length': 5.1644736842105265, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A "Roman Commonwealth" of Knowledge: Fragments of Belief and the Disbelieving Power of Didactic

In a sovereign state, John Locke teaches, the "act of the majority" may "pass" for that of the whole.1 Exploring the common ground between consenting individuals and majoritarian states, Locke finds that a collection of qualified statements of consent may support the fiction of unanimity. By ratifying an assortment of particular laws binding on the sovereign whole, the citizens of a Lockean commonwealth open up a limited political and psychological space in which fictions of authority pass for facts of civil life and in which enfranchised persons and empowered nations comfortably represent one another. I submit that this Lockean common ground between individual and state, whole and fragment, may serve as a staging area for an attack on the problem of literary meaning and didacticism, both as it was understood by a "majority" of