Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adorno ventured the claim that the entire programme of Western philosophy consists in self-reflection: “philosophy in general has been the implementation of just this νóησις υοήσεως that he [Aristotle] ascribes to the divine principle as the primal image of all philosophy” (MCP 94–5). He repeats this claim in his lectures on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: “philosophy is really a matter of ‘thinking on thinking’, as Aristotle defined it” (KCPR 82). But if self-reflection has been the lifeblood of philosophy, Adorno insists that it is not an end in itself. Denouncing Western reason because it effectively condemns thought to thinking itself, he argued that, to escape the sphere of immanence, of narcissistic navel-gazing, thought must become self-critical. He stressed the need for critical self-reflection throughout his work, and dignified it with the name “metaphysics”. Metaphysics should not limit itself to the “self-reflection of thought and of the pure forms of thought”. As self-critical, metaphysics must question the tacit, unexamined “thesis of the whole metaphysical tradition”, namely “whether thought and its constitutive forms are in fact the absolute” (MCP 99).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".