MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240115654 · doi:10.22329/p.v8i1.3909

The Making of Phenomenology as an Autonomous Discipline

2013· article· en· W2240115654 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhaenEx · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhenomenology and Existential Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenology (philosophy)Transcendental numberEpistemologyConsciousnessApophanticTranscendental philosophyPhilosophical logicPhilosophyLegitimacyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present article analyses the transformation of the first version of phenomenology, introduced by Husserl in the Prolegomena to Pure Logic (1900), into the transcendental phenomenology as outlined in Introduction to Logic and Theory of Knowledge (1906-7). First, it is argued that phenomenology was initially conceived as a discipline that should clarify the legitimacy of the objective constructions of pure logic by relating them to the corresponding subjective acts of thought. Then, it is shown that Husserl acknowledges that this first investigation is dependent on pure logic, and that he gradually extends the phenomenological tasks so as to develop an autonomous universal science of pure consciousness, committed to exploring the totality of the experience of the world. However, it is suggested, in the conclusion, that the problem of the dependence on pure logic is not completely solved in 1906-7.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.311 · 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