Bibliographic record
Abstract
In opening his thematic discussion of the relationship of justice to friendship, Aristotle says, “It seems, then, just as we said at the beginning, that friendship and the just deal with the same things and involve the same persons” (1159b25–26). In fact, what Aristotle said at the beginning of his treatment of friendship was somewhat different: “When men are friends they have no need of justice, but when they are just they need friendship in addition, and justice in the highest sense seems to involve an element of friendship” (1155a26–28). The first clause of this earlier statement is ambiguous, for although it might be taken merely to mean that successful friendship must include justice, it encourages the more pleasing thought that friendship dispenses with the need for justice altogether, or at least that it automatically produces justice without effort. Aristotle's new formulation of the relation of justice to friendship suggests that these more hopeful readings would be unjustified. Friendship would automatically include justice if mere goodwill were enough to secure justice, but Aristotle has shown that even the most ardent goodwill is not enough to equalize benefits where capacities are highly unequal, and that goodwill alone is often too thin a reed to rely upon.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".