MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2546979584 · doi:10.21971/p7bc87

Hugo Drochon, Nietzsche’s Great Politics

2016· article· nl· W2546979584 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mina Mitreva

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing boundaries · 2016
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsHistoryPhilosophyLiteraturePolitical scienceArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Friedrich Nietzsche remains one of the most influential thinkers of the nineteenth century.The large number of his works, the wide variety of themes and problems he treated, his changes of opinion, and the status of his unpublished and largely untranslated notes (Nachlass) have all contributed to divergent and opposing interpretations of his thought.Within these wide-ranging scholarly debates, Nietzsche's political ideas and his bearing on political thought are an especially divisive issue, as he does not fit easily into the genre of political thought and his oeuvre lacks recognizably political texts.Nietzsche's cult of the individual and his concern with morality has led the majority of scholars to consider him as a non-political thinker.Despite this, some of Nietzsche's key philosophical concepts have an 1 unmistakeably political character, such as the will to power and master and slave morality.For this reason, a growing body of literature has begun to challenge the anti-political reading of Nietzsche and examines the political dimension of his thought.Those scholars who agree 2 that politics does have a significant place in Nietzsche's works emphasise different parts of his project.

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)0.002
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossing boundariesSame topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and HegelFrench-language works237,207