MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004972828 · doi:10.1080/10848770.2014.876208

In Search of the True Hegel

2014· article· en· W2004972828 on OpenAlex
Brayton Polka

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

VenueThe European Legacy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityVanier College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegelianismPhilosophyFaithReading (process)CriticismPostmodernismEpistemologyDeconstruction (building)LiteratureArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size I want to thank Mark Cauchi and Christopher Irwin for reading my review-essay and for providing me with critical comments on it.Notes1. When, in a single paragraph of my review-essay, I cite consecutively two or more passages from the same page of Hegel & the Infinite, the page number is given at the end of the last passage cited.2. An apt example of the constipated reading of Hegel, as found among those committed to postmodern deconstruction, and for which Žižek has his ready remedy, is provided by Roger W. H. Savage in his Hermeneutics and Music Criticism (New York: Routledge, 2010). Savage writes, for example, that in a composition like Erwartung Schoenberg gives us a sense “of suspenseful foreboding” by “shattering the Hegelian confidence in history and reason” (118). What Savage fails to see, however, is that, Hegel, like all our great modern thinkers and artists, constantly tests our confidence in history and reason by showing us that we have always to confront the “confidence man,” the con-artist who tests the confidence that we have in (our) history and reason. It is precisely faith (con-fidence) that gives rise to deception, to false confidence or security in history and reason. Still, in what can we truly have confidence if not in our history and our reason?3. Desmond acknowledges the importance of “the unconditional” in Kant (see 133). Yet, he claims that Kant does not see that the “unconditional is given before one’s freedom to determine oneself” (137). Surely, however, what Kant shows us is that, in willing unconditionally—in undertaking to treat all human beings as ends in themselves (as persons), not as means (things), in doing unto others what I want others to do unto me—the freedom of my self-determination is not prior to the unconditionality of the other. Rather, the freedom of my self-determination is constituted by the unconditionality of the other.4. We thus see why Buber understands the I-thou relation as the in-between and why Kierkegaard, in Works of Love, understands God as the “third” (partner) in the loving relationship between self and other: each of the two is the third but only in and through the other. Neither “possesses” or “masters” (the power/the weakness of) the third.5. It is a severe shortcoming of the essays in this collection that their authors, given that many of them, to their credit, do focus on Hegel’s philosophy of religion, do not make key doctrines of biblical ontology central to their discussion, above all, the doctrines of creation ex nihilo and of sin. Thus, they do not discuss the several commentaries that Hegel has on the story of the Fall, in which he writes that we find “the eternal mythus of man—in fact, the very transition by which he becomes man.” The Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree (New York: Dover, 1956), 321–22.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.281 · 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