Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concept and property According to Aristotle, the Nicomachean Ethics is a work of political science, and political science considers “just and kalon things” ( i .3, 1094b14). He devotes a whole book to a discussion of justice, but he offers no explicit discussion of the kalon. The Eudemian Ethics begins by rejecting the view expressed in the Delian epigram, that the most kalon, the best, and the pleasantest are three different things. Aristotle affirms that happiness is the one thing that has all three superlative properties (1214a1–8). But he does not support this claim with a detailed account of the kalon. It is not surprising, then, that critics have tried to fill this gap in Aristotle, or that they have found it difficult to reach agreement. I want to discuss some of the questions that arise about the kalon in the Ethics , with some reference to the use of “kalon” elsewhere in the Aristotelian corpus. I will not consider other potentially relevant sources of evidence. These sources include the Platonic corpus, the use of “kalon” and its Latin equivalent “honestum” in later ethical thought, and, more generally, the use of “kalon” in non-philosophical Greek in and before Aristotle’s time. I leave them aside because I am not confident that they have been adequately studied for our present purposes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".