MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749411208

Who am I to judge?: The Humean answer to cultural relativism

2016· article· en· W2749411208 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueQuadrant · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtueNoticeCultural relativismObject (grammar)Human rightsFoundation (evidence)RelativismLawSociologyPleasureEpistemologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyEnvironmental ethicsPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Go to an American or Canadian or British or New Zealand or Australian university, and I dare say to one in Germany, France or anywhere else in the Western world, and you will soon notice two competing claims about the status of individuals and societies. One is universalist; it makes claims as to how all human beings-just by virtue, say, of being human or possessing reason or being God's children or having a capacity to feel pain and pleasure or being the object of some hypothetical social contract-are entitled to the same general thing when in the same general position. The whole post-Second World War human rights edifice is built on this sort of universalist foundation.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.086
Scholarly communication0.0100.019
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0120.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueQuadrantSame topicPolitical Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207