MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493239850 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781107707115.004

Michael Oakeshott: Life’s Adventure

2014· book-chapter· en· W2493239850 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald Beiner

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Philosophy · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdventureArtArt historyEnvironmental ethicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The political philosophy unfolded in On Human Conduct certainly lacks nothing for radicalism. The core of Michael Oakeshott’s theorizing is the idea that, as the mandate of the modern state expands, the possibility of living life as the self-sufficient adventure it is meant to be contracts. On Human Conduct is above all a reflection on the nature of the state. It can hardly be an accident that Hobbes and Hegel, two of the figures within the canonical theory tradition who most deeply engaged Oakeshott intellectually, were also utterly preoccupied with the project of theorizing the state. There is no question that Oakeshott wants a severe constraining of the scope of state activity, but this view of the state would not have the philosophical character that it does if it were not tied to views about what it is to live life. An ordinary sort of human life, such as we all must lead, is inhabiting and responding to a present composed of objects and happenings ... related to ourselves as the objects of our attention and concern.... Each of us occupies such a present as his own; it is a personal present.... My Venice is not your Venice, and this grove of trees, which to me now is a shelter from the rain or a place to play hide-and-seek, to another (or to me in different circumstances) may be a defence against soil erosion. Oakeshott’s guiding conception comes out most clearly when he distinguishes between an association “of pilgrims, travelling to a common destination” and an association “of adventurers,” each wandering in a unique direction (p. 243). As individuals, we have a responsibility to respond reflectively to the worlds in which we find ourselves and to exert practical intelligence in comporting ourselves to those worlds of practical existence. An overactive state, for Oakeshott, is a clear sign that individuals are abdicating that responsibility or seeking ways to lessen the burden of exercising reflective intelligence. (More precisely, the problem is not an overactive state but a state that takes itself to be purposive at all .) When Oakeshott speaks of the “individual manqué ” (p. 275), he implies a kind of duty to be the sort of individual who is not an individual manqué , and he urges us to repudiate visions of the state that (he thinks) encourage or facilitate such moral abdication.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical PhilosophySame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207