MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

メルロ= ポンティにおける「間身体性」の教育学的意義 : 「身体の教育」再考

2011· article· en· W23251717 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
遼 奥井

Bibliographic record

Venue京都大学大学院教育学研究科紀要 · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to reconsider the education of the body, by referring to the phenomenological framework of Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961). Many interests in the body among educational studies have been given to changing bodies or improving performances as the education of “through the body.” On the other hand, works of the body, according to Merleau-Ponty’s framework, are the base of the experience of the world, which has already moved before a reflective subject thinks about world. If it is so, we can understand that these works of the body have been beyond our educational attempts or intentions. In this paper, I describe these works of the body, which provides a perspective to its education. To explain this perspective, I first consider the influences of Husserl to Merleau-Ponty, who expands and deepens the basic framework proposed by the Husserl’s phenomenology, especially about the idea of“ Lebenswelt” transforming to“ le monde vécu.” Second, I investigate the concept of “intercorporéité, ” which is regarded as a key concept in describing the experience of the world. In conclusion, I reconsider the education of the body by claiming the educational significance of the concept of “intercorporéité” and the phenomenological mode of thought in educational studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue京都大学大学院教育学研究科紀要→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→