MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004546103 · doi:10.7202/1027220ar

Penser le soi : relations, appartenances et capacités

2014· article· fr· W2004546103 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marc-Antoine Vallée

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyEthnologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans leurs différents efforts pour se défaire de toute forme d’absolutisation du sujet, plusieurs philosophes ont cherché à développer une intelligence relationnelle du soi. Pour ce faire, ils ont largement puisé dans la tradition judéo-chrétienne qui avait déjà ouvert la voie dans cette direction. Cet article montre, plus précisément, que cette intelligence relationnelle du soi se développe chez Kierkegaard, Buber, Levinas et Marion à travers une reprise philosophique du modèle de l’homme devant Dieu. Mais le problème est qu’une telle approche peine à reconnaître une véritable consistance au soi. Pour éviter cet écueil, l’auteur mobilise la pensée de Paul Ricoeur afin de défendre la thèse selon laquelle les relations, les appartenances et les capacités constitueraient les trois déterminations fondamentales du soi.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.193
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.133 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207