MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987598325 · doi:10.1017/s0012217300018898

Are Mental Properties Causally Relevant?

2001· article· fr· W1987598325 on OpenAlex
Paul Raymont

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

VenueDialogue · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy and History of Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉ Les physicalistes non réductivistes sont de plus en plus souvent considérés comme des épiphénoménalistes involontaires, puisque leur refus de réduire les traits mentaux à des propriétés physiques implique, dit-on, que s'il y a bien des causes mentales, aucune d'elles, néanmoins, ne produit ses effets en vertu du type d'état mental qu'elle représente. Face à cette critique, j'examine, et rejette, la réponse qui fait appel à l'idée de «trope». Je tiens, cependant, pour instructif cet échec du modèle de la pertinence causale basé sur les tropes, dans la mesure où il illustre une confusion qui est au cœur même du concept de pertinence causale, un concept qui est central dans la critique du physicalisme non réductiviste. En identifiant cette confusion, j'espère dissiper l'idée que le physicalisme non réductiviste véhiculerait quelque engagement envers l'épiphénoménalisme.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.143 · 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