MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809757713 · doi:10.7202/1048619ar

D’une réduction phénoménologique pratique.  Scheler, Heidegger et l’appel de la conscience1

2018· article· fr· W2809757713 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paul Slama

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, je souhaite comprendre comment Max Scheler et Martin Heidegger comprennent les normes sociales pour nos perceptions et nos pratiques quotidiennes, et comment ils décrivent la nécessité d’un dépassement de cette normativité au profit d’une autre, plus « personnelle » ou encore plus « authentique ». Je montre que c’est un appel de la conscience qui rompt la normativité sociale, et qui engage l’être humain à ne plus agir mécaniquement, mais à vivre librement. Cette rupture avec la normativité sociale est une réduction phénoménologique que nous appelons « réduction éthique ». Tout l’enjeu de l’article est de montrer qu’une telle réduction repose en fait sur les normativités sociales en tant qu’elles sont le critère de l’appel, le milieu où un tel appel est possible. De ce point de vue, le sujet réflexif demeure un sujet social.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.027
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political TheoryFrench-language works237,207