MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gadamer’s ‘apologia for the art of healing’: an application to gerontological nursing practice

2007· article· en· W2099861190 on OpenAlexaff
Mitzi G. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Philosophy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcrastinationNursing practiceGerontological nursingGeorge (robot)NursingEpistemologyPsychologyPhilosophySociologyMedicinePsychotherapistArt historyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will discuss Hans-George Gadamer's 'The Enigma of Health' Chapter 2, 'Apologia for the Art of Healing's (1965). In this chapter, Gadamer defends the art of healing as essentially an ability to reproduce and re-establish the health of an ill person. He considers modern medicine's progressive reliance on technology as mechanical rather than an art of healing. In support of this concept, I will also refer to Gadamer's Chapter 6, 'Between Nature and Art' and briefly to Beardsworth's 'Practices of Procrastination'. First, I will discuss the above works showing how the authors make their arguments and what conclusions they draw, and then I will relate these arguments and conclusions to nursing, gerontological nursing in particular.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.319 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing PhilosophySame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207