Bibliographic record
Abstract
In essence, nihilism is the negation of traditional western metaphysics and the negation of the western civilization. Nietzsche’s understanding of nihilism firstly was to associate the nihilism with the Platonism which was the origins of western metaphysics, and then he pointed out that the final result of Platonism was nihilism. On this basis, Nietzsche criticized the previous all values in hierarchy and set up the new highest value namely the will to power, in order to overcome the European nihilism. However, the highest value which is called the will to power by Nietzsche still fell into the stereotype of metaphysics of subjectivity. By questioning the being, Heidegger overcame the traditional metaphysics and nihilism, but his philosophy only strengthened the metaphysics of subjectivity at a higher level in essence, so Heidegger did not fundamentally overcame the traditional metaphysics and European nihilism. In the context of western philosophy, only abandoning itself by the metaphysics of subjectivity, it could fundamentally overcome the problems of nihilism.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".