MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1861661707 · doi:10.29173/cmplct8742

Teaching and Ethics in Complexity Science: The Ethics of Absolute Unitary Being

2006· article· en· W1861661707 on OpenAlex
Joyce Mgombelo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComplicity An International Journal of Complexity and Education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEmbodied and Extended Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsciousnessUnitary stateAbsolute (philosophy)Unconscious mindEpistemologySociologyAutopoiesisPhilosophyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper argues for the significance of complexity science and its role in the ethics of teaching that is not based on moral codes. Through the work of Varela on human consciousness, and the work of Newburg and his colleagues on neurotheology, the paper explores the elements of human consciousness that are relevant for characterising an ethical act. Varela’s concepts of emergent self and autopoiesis as well as Newburg’s concept of Absolute Unitary Being provide the necessary conditions for characterizing an ethical act as essentially unconscious. Finally the paper discusses the implication of these contentions for ethics in teaching.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.245 · 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