MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082225677 · doi:10.7202/004917ar

Qui a peur des qualia corporels?

2002· article· fr· W2082225677 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jérôme Dokic

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualiaHumanitiesPhilosophyConscienceConsciousnessEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les qualia , considérés comme des propriétés intrinsèques de nos expériences, ne sont pas toujours bien accueillis par les matérialistes, qui préfèrent les considérer comme des propriétés intentionnelles présentées dans l’expérience. Je me demande si cette forme de réductionnisme s’applique aux qualia de la conscience corporelle. Selon la théorie matérialiste standard, l’objet intentionnel de l’expérience de la douleur, par exemple, est un dommage physique. Mais cette théorie ne rend pas compte de la différence phénoménale entre ressentir une douleur « de l’intérieur » et la percevoir « à l’extérieur ». J’esquisse une autre analyse réductionniste, compatible avec le matérialisme, selon laquelle l’objet intentionnel de la conscience corporelle, contrairement à celui de la conscience externe, dépend de manière constitutive de l’expérience du sujet.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.006

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 head0.510
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207