MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479201050 · doi:10.1017/ccol9780521860543.007

Rhetoric, aesthetics, and the voice

2009· book-chapter· en· W2479201050 on OpenAlexaff
James Porter

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhetoricAnecdoteLiteratureArtActive listeningAestheticsPhilosophyPsychologyLinguisticsCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The voice is speaking, but the speaker is reading. (Susan Stewart) The history of rhetoric in three easy lessons In the eighth book of his Lives of the Philosophers , Diogenes Laertius relates an anecdote about Pythagoras in the light of which Pythagoras seems to have perfected if not the art of rhetoric, then at least its essence. The account is of a most unusual rite of passage. According to Diogenes, and the story is repeated by Iamblichus in his own Life of Pythagoras , Pythagoras used to lecture for long periods to his pupils, whether hidden behind a curtain or lecturing only at night in utter darkness (Diogenes Laertius 8.15; Iamblicus, Life of Pythagoras 72). “For five years [his disciples] would keep silent, merely listening to his speeches without seeing him, until they passed a test. From that point on they were allowed into his house and were able to see him” (Diogenes Laertius 8.10). How many speakers in antiquity (or at any time) could hold an audience captive like this for an evening, let alone for five years? To be sure, Pythagoras was not an orator and his lectures were not oratory. But he grasped a fact about rhetoric that would define it for centuries to come: rhetoric was the art of managing the voice. Nevertheless, it was not Pythagoras but rather two figures from epic, Nestor and Odysseus, who would come to embody the spirit of rhetoric in the ancient imaginary, albeit in two distinct ways. Nestor, the elder statesman of the Homeric Greeks, was endowed with a mellifluous tongue and the gift of gab: he was the embodiment of persuasion. His sagacity was announced by his solemnity, his gait, and his age. Once he opened his lips, this physical impression was confirmed. Odysseus, by contrast, was the master of deception, though you would never guess this from the way he looked. Outwardly unheroic, small in stature, even ungainly, he also seemed idiotic and incapable of speech.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.033
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207