Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generalement, on presente Husserl comme etant un penseur hostile a toute forme de speculation philosophique qui voudrait reconduire la pensee rationnelle a son soubassement naturel et empirique. Toutefois, le probleme manifeste et obvie que pose cette interpretation, c’est que Husserl se sert lui-meme d’un vocabulaire d’inspiration vitaliste et naturaliste pour rendre compte du registre de la rationalite. En prenant pour fil conducteur la notion de pulsion d’autoconservation telle qu’elle se decline dans Experience et jugement, les Meditations cartesiennes et l’Introduction a l’ethique de 1920-1924, je voudrais clarifier le statut de la nature et de l’instinctivite chez le Husserl de la maturite. Ce parcours me menera a compliquer, sans pourtant l’effacer, le dualisme de l’esprit et de la nature tel qu’il se met notamment en place dans les Idees II.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".