MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1580448138 · doi:10.14288/tci.v10i2.184447

An Exploration of “Ethics” in a Post-modern, Complex, Global Society

2013· article· en· W1580448138 on OpenAlexaff
William E. Doll

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWhitehead's Philosophy and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumilityRelation (database)MoralityNormative ethicsEpistemologyMeta-ethicsSociologyInformation ethicsEnvironmental ethicsSet (abstract data type)CertaintyApplied ethicsLawPhilosophyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a foray, a tentative one, into the relation between moral acts and ethical principles, particularly as that relation is played out in our post-modern, complex, global society. The position taken here is that a traditional view of ethics sees an act being determined as moral (or not) according to its fit into a set of a priori principles. The alternative, post-modern view explored here is that the concept of ethics emerges from the acts themselves. The morality of these acts derives from the everyday decisions we make, decisions made with humility and uncertainty. From such decision making, the ethics that emerges is a provisional ethics. This is the nature of our being human; our decisions are never made with certainty. We are, though, responsible for the decisions we make.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.071
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicWhitehead's Philosophy and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207