Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le but de défendre la thèse de la correspondance entre le comportement moral et le bonheur, j’analyse dans cet article le cas problématique des psychopathes. Les psychopathes sont des individus qui ne reculent devant aucun interdit moral pour satisfaire leurs désirs, et qui ne ressentent aucun remord ou scrupule face à leurs agissements. En ce sens, ils paraissent obtenir un « ticket gratuit » dans le domaine de la moralité. Comment un défenseur de la thèse de la correspondance entre moralité et bonheur peut-il rendre compte du cas du psychopathe ? Le psychopathe vient-il réfuter cette thèse, ou représente-t-il plutôt une exception légitime ? Je défendrai ici une solution alternative ; après avoir proposé une version plausible de la thèse de la correspondance, je tenterai de démontrer que les psychopathes ne sont pas heureux, et ce en vertu de caractéristiques essentielles de la psychopathie. Leur statut de « criminel en puissance » et leur faible capacité de contentement sont les deux éléments centraux qui m’amèneront à conclure que les psychopathes ne sont pas heureux. Loin de réfuter ou d’échapper à la thèse de la correspondance, le cas des psychopathes vient donc en réalité renforcer cette thèse.My goal in this paper is to defend the idea of a general correspondence between happiness and morality, and I do so by analyzing the problematic case of psychopaths. Psychopaths are individuals who are not bothered by moral restrictions when it comes to satisfying their desires. They feel no remorse and have no scruples, and as such they appear to be “free-riders” in the realm of morality. The unusual case of psychopaths will therefore pose a problem to someone who argues that there is a correspondence between happiness and morality: should psychopaths be seen as refuting the correspondence rule, or are they merely a legitimate exception to that rule? I will propose an alternative explanation; after having presented a plausible version of the correspondence thesis, I will try to show that psychopaths, for reasons constitutive of their nature, really are not happy. Psychopaths’ quasi-inevitable criminal behaviours as well as their low capacity for contentment are two central elements that lead me to argue that they are not happy. I therefore conclude that psychopaths, far from refuting the correspondence thesis, actually reinforce that thesis.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".