MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080501972 · doi:10.1177/1474885111417777

Friendship and politics in Aristotle’s <i>Nicomachean Ethics</i>

2011· article· en· W2080501972 on OpenAlex
Ann Ward

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

VenueEuropean Journal of Political Theory · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipPoliticsVirtueEconomic JusticeSociologyPolitical philosophyLawPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsSocial psychologyEpistemologyAestheticsGender studiesSocial sciencePhilosophyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aristotle’s discussion of political friendship points to perfect friendship and the possibility that the good citizen can be the good person. This conclusion is arrived at by reflection on three problems raised in Aristotle’s analysis. First, citizen friendships of utility are the cause of civil strife. Second, there is a tension between citizen friendship in timocracy and justice. Although citizen friendship in a timocracy can aspire to perfect friendship, political justice requires kingship. Third, familial friendship, although natural, is more limited in scope than political friendship. This article concludes with Aristotle’s discussion of conflicting obligations that opens up two grounds of natural friendship: relations to persons through body, and relations to persons who are virtuous. Virtue relations in timocracy allow citizen friendship to resemble perfect friendship.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.148 · 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