Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the years Aristotle’s discussion of contemplation and eudaimonia in Book x of the Nicomachean Ethics has been a thorn in the side of his readers. Some commentators have taken it to be inconsistent with the rest of the N.E ., one even maintaining that it was not meant seriously but instead was an instance of irony. Among the reasons for these reactions are the following. Although contemplation is mentioned in N.E . i .5 as a candidate for the good whose realization in a life constitutes a life of eudaimonia , almost all of the N.E . leading up to N.E . x is occupied with rather detailed discussions of ethical virtue, various specific ethical virtues, and topics such as practical wisdom, continence and incontinence, pleasure, and friendship, all of which have important connections with ethical virtue. In the middle of N.E . x , however, Aristotle seems to say that contemplation is the good whose realization in a life constitutes the primary form of eudaimonia . The political life, a life that includes the exercise of ethical virtue, is only a secondary form of eudaimonia . Where did this pre-eminence of contemplation come from? After all the attention he has given to ethical virtue, how could Aristotle relegate a life of ethical virtue to second place?
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".