Valor, racionalidad y justicia conmutativa en El Estado comercial cerrado de Fichte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the relations between law, economy and rationality in Fichte’s “The Closed Commercial State”. In order to do so, I will first focus on the relation that exists in such a work between the theory of contracts and the theory of value. I will argue that the peculiar theory of value exposed there is ultimately due to legal requirements derived from the Fichte’s notion of property. That notion obliges to ensure, not only that nobody suffers from necessity, but also that there is some equivalence in the benefits that the parties perform in an exchange. This leads Fichte to the problem —recurring in natural rights theories— of just price. The relations between Fichte's economic theory and the rationality attributed to juridical-economic agents will be examined below. Since this rationality coincides with the motivation that the political economy of its peers assigns to the agents, certain reasons for why Fichte rejected such economic theories are examined and proposed. It will be emphasized, finally, the disagreements that seem to exist between, on the one hand, Fichte's theory of law and economic theory and, on the other hand, the selfish rationality that constantly presupposes in the economic agents.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".