Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I found reading Rowett's excellent book, Knowledge and Truth in Plato, oddly exhausting; partly in the sense in which looking at a source of brightness and clarity can be exhausting, and partly because, while I find myself enthusiastically agreeing with her overall argument, I am not quite comfortable with some of the details. Rowett argues, among many other things, that Plato rejects the assumption that to understand a concept is to be able to state its definition, and replaces it with what she calls his ‘iconic method’. She also argues that when Plato speaks of epistēmē, he means conceptual knowledge, i.e. the grasp of a type qua type (or, equivalently, a concept). It seems easier to see what conceptual knowledge is not. Rowett argues, convincingly, that conceptual knowledge is not propositional (p. 107) or linguistic (p. 113). Although it may sometimes enable us to state definitions (p. 163), such statements are mere manifestations of it, not to be confused with conceptual knowledge itself (p. 27). Second, conceptual knowledge is not a sort of acquaintance with a non-propositional object. Following Frege, Rowett distinguishes between concepts and objects in terms of their role (p. 264), so that justice, for instance, cannot be an object of predication while at the same time functioning as a concept. Therefore, to grasp a concept qua concept is not to grasp an object, whether by description or acquaintance. Third, Rowett argues that conceptual knowledge is not a form of ‘know how’. On this latter point, I find her argument less than coercive. She says that ‘someone who has a grasp of a concept is likely to exhibit know-how as a result, but we should not infer that the knowledge consists in the “knowing how”’ (p. 270). I can see two ways of reading this. The point might be that just as an ability does not consist in any finite number of performances, conceptual knowledge does not consist in any finite number of abilities. But why should this be true? Abilities do not differ from concepts in the same way in which particular performances differ from abilities. Alternatively, Rowett might be making the valid point that where conceptual knowledge and an ability manifest themselves in the same behaviour, this does not imply that they are the same. This observation, however, will not force anyone to admit that conceptual knowledge is not an ability. It is possible that conceptual knowledge is more fundamental than any given ability that rests on it, but it remains equally possible that conceptual knowledge is itself an ability, and thus a form of knowing how.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle