Bibliographic record
Abstract
Na primjeru Utopije morala Karla Alberta i Elenor Jain, autor pokazuje razliku između ontoloske etike kao meta fizicke etike i svih drugih proslih i suvremenih etika kao nemetaafizickih. Sredisnja pretenzija ontoloske etike kao aktualne etike primjerene vremenu leži u tome da ona može nadmasiti specificnosti pojedinacnih kultura i pokazati fundament etickog misljenja i djelovanja, koji prevladava razdvajajuce elemente tradiranih moralnih predodžaba ili religioznih normi te obraca pažnju na ono zajednicko sto ljudi i narodi doživljavaju kao iskustvo bitka, u smislu ontoloske misli, od Parmenida i Platona do Heideeggera i Lavellea. Nasuprot tom prenaglasavanju Platonove idealisticke linije u europskoj prakticnoj filozofiji, autor ovoga rada ukazuje na druge smjerove europske filozofije, te posebno istice Aristotelovu philosophia anthropina kao nemetafizicku prakticnu filozofiju u smislu jedinstva etike i politike, neovisno o metafizici. Dok Albert i Jain zagovaraju bliskost etike i estetike, te u smislu modernog globalizma povezuju europsku filozofiju s izvaneuuropskom mitoloskom i metafizickom mudroscu, autor ovoga rada ukazuje na Gadarnerovu interpretaciju odnosa phronesisa i sophiae u VI. knjizi Aristotelove Nikomahove etike i na Heideggerovu fundamentalnu ontologiju, ne kao metafiziku, nego kao hermeneuticku prakticnu filozofiju, da bi na tragu Finkove interpretacije VII. knjige Platonove Države pokazao mogucnost drukcijeg tumacenja odnosa dokse i episteme od onoga sto ga pružaju Albert i Jain, kako kod samoga Platona tako i u transcendentalnoj fenomenologiji životnog svijeta kod kasnoga Husserla. Jer suvremenom globalnom svijetu vise je potrebna nemetafizicka prakticna filozofija - kao povijesnom svijetu života primjereno misljenje - negoli metafiizicka etika i mitologija.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".