MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nota crítica sobre Francisco Galán Vélez, Una metafísica para tiempos posmetafísicos. La propuesta de Bernard Lonergan de una Metametodología, México: Universidad Iberoamericana, 2015, 488 p. A Critical Note about Francisco Galán Vélez, Una Metafísica para tiempos posmetafísicos. La propuesta de Bernard Lonergan de una Metametodología, Mexico: Universidad Iberoamericana, 2015, 488 p.

2017· article· es· W2624229906 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paniel Reyes Cárdenas

Bibliographic record

VenueMetafísica y persona · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious and Theological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanitiesMetaphysicsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta nota crítica estudia la obra reciente del Prof. Francisco Galán en su proyecto de presentar una metafísica para tiempos pos-metafísicos, es decir, el retomar la tarea de reconstruir la estructura inteligible de la realidad a partir del reconocimiento de la estruc- tura del conocimiento humano en sus distintos patrones de experiencia y articulado por el deseo desasido de conocer. El Profesor Galán encuentra inspiración en el trabajo del Jesui- ta canadiense Bernard Lonergan y presenta su proyecto como un comentario extendido y una propuesta para considerar seriamente las propuestas del mismo. This is a critical note of the recent book of Prof. Francisco Galán and his project of introducing a Meaphysics for post-metaphysical times, i.e., his endeavour to undertake a reconstruction of the intelligible structure of reality from the discovering of the structure of human knowledge in the di erent pa ern of experiences and articulated by a pure desire of knowing. Professor Galán fins inspiration in the works of the Canadian Jesuit philosopher Bernard Lonergan and introduces his own project as an extended comment and a proposal to consider seriously Lonergan’s insights.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetafísica y personaSame topicReligious and Theological StudiesFrench-language works237,207