MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987673879 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-11914

Tragic Disclosure: Stoic Diagnostics in Senecan Drama

2017· dissertation· en· W2987673879 on OpenAlexaff
Johanna Chalupiak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTragedy (event)DramaLiteraturePoeticsStoicismSubject (documents)CriticismPhilosophyReflexivityDoctrineLiterary criticismPoetryArtHistorySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, I set out to render Seneca’s ostensibly anti-Stoic tragedies consistent with the practical ends of Senecan Stoicism. I do this by reconstructing Seneca’s approach to poetics and by situating this approach within a longer tradition of philosophical criticism hospitable to poetry. I then apply this hermeneutic approach to Seneca’s paradigmatic tragedy, Medea.On my view, the Stoicism of Senecan drama lies in the meta-reflexivity Seneca invests within the phenomenon of aesthetic response. Through engagement with tragedy, the reader/auditor acquires self-knowledge instrumental to progressing along the Stoic path. Spectator response serves as a kind of diagnostic tool through which the subject learns about their disposition to allocate their care in the world, and against which they determine their alignment with Stoic doctrine.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207