Owning Ourselves and Encountering Others: Authenticity, Indifference, and Desire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are resources in Heidegger’s work for identifying and mitigating pervasive modes of misrecognition that are characteristic of modern society, and, by identifying them, we become capable of attending to “supplementary” aspects of authenticity: terms of identity should apply to all in the same way, and, because these terms are a product of all, they are the responsibility of each individual. The first section analyses Being-guilty, Dasein-with, and Being-with to emphasise Dasein’s dependence on others, arguing that the dynamic of recognition characteristic of Dasein implies a responsibility for recognising the other adequately. The second identifies common modes of misrecognition, arguing that these modes imply a shared responsibility for the contexts of recognition in which we participate. The third turns to Sartre’s work, arguing that our interpersonal relations offer resources for correcting our inadequate ways of recognizing one another and for recognizing the fundamental place of communication in the realization of human freedom.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.099 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".