MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985589586 · doi:10.1159/000057059

Piaget’s Framework for a Scientific Study of Consciousness

2001· article· en· W1985589586 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Development · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Representations and Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsciousnessMonismEpistemologyPhysicalismSubject (documents)Constructivism (international relations)Philosophy of scienceCognitive scienceObject (grammar)PsychologyPiaget's theory of cognitive developmentConsilienceCognitionCognitive developmentPhilosophyMetaphysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While largely unacknowledged, Piaget’s views on the epistemology of consciousness presaged key positions now held by contemporary philosophers and psychologists. This paper examines Piaget’s views about two fundamental epistemological problems central to any theory of consciousness: (1) the general problem of the subject-object relationship in any type of knowing; and (2) the specific problem of the physical-mental relationship within the knowing subject. Piaget adopts a unique form of internal interactionism toward the first issue and a sophisticated form of parallelism toward the second; he aimed for an eventual integrative monism while providing compelling reasons why such a monism may always exist in name only. While his approach to these problems did not solve them, his examination of the problems – and his proposed coordination of philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience – is an important path toward consilience in the scientific study and understanding of consciousness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.310 · 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