MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498417261 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511805004.002

The situation of the Meditator is described and his desire to demolish everything and begin again is explored, while the Reader is introduced to some basic philosophical concepts

2012· book-chapter· en· W2498417261 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologyPsychologyComputer scienceEngineering ethicsSociologyPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THE MEDITATOR – THE BUILDING METAPHOR – “KNOWLEDGE-CONDITIONS” – SCIENTIFIC AND UNSCIENTIFIC MENTALITIES (AT VII:17–18) Some years ago I was struck by the large number of falsehoods that I had accepted as true in my childhood, and by the highly doubtful nature of the whole edifice that I had subsequently based on them. I realized that it was necessary, once in the course of my life, to demolish everything completely and start again right from the foundations if I wanted to establish anything at all in the sciences that was stable and likely to last. ( vii :17) Our first introduction to the Meditator finds him in a mood of disillusion but, at the same time, full of confident resolve. The Meditator's aim, it seems, is to establish something in the sciences that will be “stable and likely to last.” He has apparently just realized that he is going to have to “demolish everything completely” and start again “right from the foundations” in order to accomplish this task. This announcement raises a number of questions. Who is the Meditator and why is he so disenchanted? How did the Meditator discover “some years ago” that the beliefs he had acquired in childhood and built on subsequently were falsehoods? Why did he wait so long to do anything about this grievous state of affairs? What is the plan to demolish “everything” completely and why does the Meditator think demolishing everything is the essential first step to establishing “something” firm in the sciences?

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.018
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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