Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starting from the idea that the present concern with citizenship education is a form of reminiscence of the philosophical interest of the Ancients regarding this question, this article attempts to demonstrate that the recovery of this tradition is apt to enlighten the pedagogical stakes of this concern. Not only is the critical formation of the citizen posited by the philosophers as an essential structure for the vitality and the political balance of a society but it is found very often at the centre of their philosophical project. By adopting a historical-critical approach, I wish in this way to develop the idea that the formation of critical thinking, beyond all acquisition of transversal competence, constitutes the pillar of civic competence. This last point will allow us to bring out certain paradoxes regarding the finality of civic education. Finally it is by restoring the ancient dilemma of the conflict between the critical and the civic, as illustrated by the Socratic figure, that I shall propose a model of citizenship practice.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.063 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".