MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2489841258 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511977626.009

Aristotle, agents, and actions

2011· book-chapter· en· W2489841258 on OpenAlex
Iakovos Vasiliou

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerosityAnalogyHabituationCharacter (mathematics)PhilosophyEconomic JusticeCouragePsychologyEpistemologyTheologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the heart of Aristotle’s account of ethical upbringing is habituation. At least all of the virtues of character – justice, generosity, temperance, courage, and so on – just are habituated states brought about by the repeated doing of actions of a certain ethical type. We are not born courageous or cowardly (although we may have natural dispositions in one direction or the other); rather, we are made courageous or cowardly insofar as we have engaged in courageous or cowardly actions in our lives. Engaging in actions of a certain type gives rise to the corresponding habituated state of character. In short, “we become just by doing just things, temperate by doing temperate things, and courageous by doing courageous things” (N.E. ii.1, 1103a34–b2). Let us call this idea “the habituation principle” (HP). As the explicit analogy with craft (technê) in N.E. ii.1 shows, the habituation principle is itself value neutral: one becomes a good harpist or a good builder if one acquires good building or harp-playing habits, but a bad one if not; similarly one becomes a virtuous person if she engages in virtuous acts, but a bad or vicious person if one doesn’t.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.104 · 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