MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786823714

Monserrat, Torres, and Planinc on Voegelin’s Return to the Ancients

2017· article· en· W2786823714 on OpenAlex
Ron Srigley

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Political Science Reviewer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyRelation (database)EpistemologyFocus (optics)Order (exchange)PleasurePsychologyPsychotherapist
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their paper “Eric Voegelin on Plato’s Philebus,” Monserrat and Torres offer a compelling discussion of Voegelin’s evocative but ambiguous term metaxy, the pedagogical role of pleasure and pain in his thought, and his notion of a Promethean theophany of order. They do so by examining his analyses of these things in relation to a dialogue that Voegelin often cites as a source-text for his findings but rarely discusses in detail: Plato’s Philebus. I think theirs is one of the most fruitful ways of continuing Voegelin’s project. Best to return to the primary sources in the same spirit in which Voegelin did, following up leads and provocative suggestions but also approaching the texts with the same critical focus that characterized Voegelin’s own work. Since time is limited I will focus primarily on their discussion of the metaxy. It occupies the largest portion of their paper and underlies much of their subsequent discussion of Voegelin’s use of the Philebus for his account of pedagogy and theophany.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.236 · 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