Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This is the second volume of Open Philosophy since the official launch of the journal in 2018.Two years is perhaps enough time for a journal style to emerge, and that is what I will reflect on here.Along with the usual virtues of open access publication -increased readership being foremost among them-there are three features of this journal of which I am already proud.The first is our relatively quick turnaround time on peer reviews, even in an era when academics are overstretched and thus less apt than before to agree to review work: a recent phenomenon familiar to most of those involved with academic publishing.The second is the ability -common to all online journals, though not fully utilized in every case-to publish articles individually as they are accepted rather than having to wait for the final contribution to drift in before bringing anything at all into print.Third, and perhaps most important, is the intellectual diversity of the journal so far.One of our topical issues in 2018 was the fifteen-article "The New Metaphysics: Analytic/Continental Crossovers," co-edited by Paul Livingston (University of New Mexico) and Jon Cogburn (Louisiana State University), two of the figures most associated with recent work criss-crossing the analytic/continental divide.Livingston does this especially well in research blending Derrida and Badiou with the incompleteness theorem of Kurt Gödel, and Cogburn in his book Garcian Meditations and its treatment of the continental Speculative Realism movement in terms of the enclosure paradoxes foregrounded in the work of the unorthodox analytic philosopher Graham Priest.1 The other topical issue in our debut year was "Objects Across the Traditions," edited by Tom Sparrow (Slippery Rock University), the author of three books: including the provocative and widely read The End of Phenomenology.2 Sparrow's issue featured nine articles addressing the theme of objects in a motley assortment of philosophers ranging from Spinoza through Meinong to Sartre.As will always be our policy, the first volume of Open Philosophy also made room for freestanding solo articles outside the umbrella of the official issue topics.The new volume of Open Philosophy now before you features not just two, but four separate topical issues.Mark Kingwell (University of Toronto) offers "Does Public Art Have to Be Bad Art?," including eight articles exploring multiple aspects of this timely topic in aesthetics.More technically minded readers may find themselves drawn to the intriguing articles under the rubric "Computer Modelling in Philosophy," edited by Patrick Grim (Stony Brook University).Next comes the topical issue "Experience in a New Key," under the editorship of Dorthe Jørgensen (Aarhus University), with articles ranging historically from Hegel and Kierkegaard at one end to Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe at the other.The fourth and final topical issue of the volume, edited by me personally, is entitled "Object-Oriented Ontology and Its Critics."This issue received an unusually large number of submissions, presumably due to my dual status as founder of Object-Oriented Ontology and Editor-in-Chief of Open Philosophy.In fact, so great was the number of submitted articles that we plan to offer this topic again in the 2020 volume.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
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 | 0,001 | 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 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».