Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article probes into the basis for the conformation and development of western music philosophy : the philosophy background charactorized with dimidiate subject and object ; the analysis tradition regarded thinking method ; and the free and critical spirit flooded academic tradition. Based on these, we compare the western music philosophy and Chinese music philosophy and draw the conclusion that the development of modern Chinese music philosophy should be inspired from the developmental history of western music philosophy. Key Words: Western Philosophy, Chinese Philosophy, Western Music Philosophy, Chinese Music Philosophy Resume Cet article traite le contexte philosophique caracterise par la separation du sujet d’avec l’object de la formation et le developpement de la philosophie de la musique occidentale, attachant de l’importance a l’analyse des facons de penser traditionnelles et la tradition academique impregnee de l’esprit de liberte et de critique. Par l’interpretation compare des philosophies musicales occidentale et chinoise , le texte souligne que la construction et l’approfondissement de la philosophie musicale actuelle de la Chine doit s’inspirer de l’histoire du developpement de celle de l’Occident. Mots-cles: la philosophie occidentale, la philosophie chinoise, la philosophie musicale occidentale, la philosophie musicale chinoise 摘 要： 本文探討了西方音樂哲學賴以形成和發展的以主客體二分為特徵的哲學背景，重視分析傳統的思維方式，以及充滿自由與批判精神的學術傳統。在此基礎上，將西方音樂哲學和中國音樂哲學做了比較性的闡釋，從而強調中國當今音樂哲學的建設與深化應該從西方音樂哲學發展的歷史中得到應有的啟示。 關鍵詞：西方哲學；中國哲學；西方音樂哲學；中國音樂哲學
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".