Entretien avec Peter Singer sur Jonathan Glover et l'éthique du faire-mourir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le cadre de ce numéro spécial consacré à Jonathan Glover, nous avons demandé à Peter Singer de revenir sur l’influence qu’a pu exercer sur lui l’ouvrage Questions de vie ou de mort, ainsi que le séminaire de Glover à Oxford auquel Peter Singer assista à la fin des années soixante. L’un des arguments récurrents de Peter Singer réside dans la critique de la distinction traditionnelle entre les actes et les omissions. Mais Glover n’est sans doute pas étranger à cette remise en cause, même si les deux penseurs ne semblent pas vouloir en tirer exactement les mêmes conséquences. L’enjeu s’avère être le suivant : de quoi sommes-nous réellement responsable et quel est le degré d’exigence auquel doit s’élever la morale?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".