MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Responsabilidade em Kant e em Lévinas: entre os conceitos e os fundamentos [Responsability according to Kant and to Lévinas: between the concepts and the foundations]

2012· article· pt· W2465262713 on OpenAlexaff
Ramiro Délio Borges de Meneses, A. Moreira Reis

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Ágora Filosófica · 2012
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanitiesEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Segundo Kant, a responsabilidade é o desempenho formal da liberdade. Emprimeiro lugar, está a liberdade e só depois virá a responsabilidade, segundo aCrítica da Razão Prática, segundo o imperativo categórico da razão prática. Porém,para Lévinas, no âmbito da fenomenologia religiosa, primeiro encontramose vivemos a responsabilidade, para só depois surgir a liberdade. A responsabilidadeserá um dar prioridade ao Outro. Será um sofrer com Ele e por Ele. Todavia,em Kant, pelo conceito de Freiheit , existe uma ética deontológica, enquantoque, na perspectiva de Lévinas, surge, pela sua fenomenologia bíblica, umaética da responsabilidade, como filosofia primeira, cuja ética será a metafísica.Palavras-chave: Kant; Lévinas; responsabilidade; liberdade; moralidade.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.358 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Ágora FilosóficaSame topicPsychology and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207