Hjärtats vanor, tankens välvilja och handens gärning : dygd som vårdetiskt grundbegrepp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main aim of the study is to elucidate the meaning and dimensions of the concept of „virtue‟, and to find the place of virtue in a caritative caring ethics, i.e. a caring ethics based on human love and mercy. The intention is to create a theory model which utilizes the possibilities of virtue in developing the caritative caring ethics as a whole. The caritative caring ethics has a universal potential – it is primarily not a professional ethics, but it may form a frame of reference and basis for formulating ethical codes, and for ethical discussions within different caring contexts. The hermeneutic approach of the study is inspired by Gadamer‟s philosophical hermeneutics combined with the view of hermeneutics as a hypothetical-deductive process. The study is guided by Eriksson‟s model of definition of concepts. The concept of „virtue‟ is studied focusing on its ethical dimensions. These ethical dimensions of virtue are seen as anchored to an inner ethos, whereas ethos stands for the ontological goodness, a basic notion of the Good that permeates the entity of the human being, and forms the base of the culture where he lives and acts. The overarching research questions are: 1. What is virtue? 2. What is „virtue‟ as a basic concept in caring science? 3. What place does virtue have in caritative caring ethics? The answer of the first question is mainly searched for by an ontological determination comprising partly an etymologic and semantic analysis of „virtue‟, and partly a determination of the essence of virtue. The answer to the second and third questions are mainly searched for using a contextual determination, where the purposive context and pragmatic features of virtue are studied in relation to caring ethics. The ontological and contextual determinations are brought together through hermeneutical interpretation, forming a new whole, which constitutes the results of the study. The results of the study are depicted in a theory model, in which the movement of virtue from ethos to deed is moulded as caritative caring ethics. The material of the study consists of dictionaries, texts written by Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas, articles, dissertations, and books, as well as parts of a pilot survey answered by 33 nurses. The results of the study show that the essence of virtue is primarily functional, not ethical. The ethical emerges when virtue is contextualized in a human communion. Virtue makes something fulfil its function well; makes the human being good, and gives him morals and morality. The human being needs prudence, love, and humility to acquire and develop the moral virtues. Virtue is a power, related to a value, which considering a caritative caring ethics consists of the caritas motif. Human love is shown through deeds, making the human being do what he is expected to do. Virtue, as an active power of becoming, affirms and clarifies the human being‟s ability to develop in the direction of the Good. Virtue becomes essential and unifying when morality appears in the human mind as auctoritas, an inner, prompting power based on divinity or a transcendental ethos. Together ethos and virtue create opportunities for an inner ethics based on voluntariness and joy in being and doing the true, the good, and the beautiful.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.013 |
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".