Модель екологічної естетики в теоретичній розробці Юріо Сепанмаа
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A rather new discipline for Ukraine which is called environmental aesthetics is under consideration in the article. The analysis of environmental aesthetics that explores the global problem of coexistence of man and nature through the definition of aesthetic value and symbolic meaning of the environment is the main focus in the modern philosophical discourse. The actuality of the topic is evident because environmental aesthetics is a developed discipline in the USA, Canada and Finland, some steps of analyses are made in Russia, but in Ukraine it has not become the subject of scientific discussion yet. It is necessary to stress the possibility of practical application of theoretical achievements in this field of \nresearch: in the Ukrainian educational space a course entitled «Environmental aesthetics» written by head of Kyiv ecological and cultural center V. Boreiko was introduced. It is aimed at giving skills of environmental and aesthetic attitudes towards the world of nature. \nThe concept of environmental aesthetics created by the Finnish philosopher Y. Sepanmaa as one of the most prolific western treatment is considered in the article It reveales a substantive field and the main issues of environmental aesthetics that are fed into the overall context of aesthetic theory in the frames of ontology and metacriticism of environmental aesthetics. This study is conceptual and philosophical. \nIn the paper the author mainly appeals to the work «The Beauty of Environment: A General model for Environmental Aesthetics», as it is the most thorough exposition of environmental aesthetics in this field of research. Firstly, Y. Sepanmaa has noted that there were three starting points for environmental aesthetics: the philosophy of beauty, the philosophy of art, and the metacriticism. \nEnvironmental aesthetics is the aesthetics of a real world. It is analyzed as a sphere of aesthetic appreciation of objects of the environment. Then, the author offered the classification of aesthetic objects: there are two types (natural and artificial) and three kinds: 1) works of art, 2) the invironment (in a state of nature and altered), 3) environmental art. \nThere are no limits or criteria for the differentiating the class of «objects of environmental aesthetics», because there are no limits for them in space and time. Making the environment an aesthetic object is based only on a decision of the recipient. After that, the philosopher identifies three ways of aesthetic descriptions: description, interpretation, evaluation. \nIt is concluded that the work «The Beauty of Environment: A General model for Environmental Aesthetics» helps to understand that environmental aesthetics belongs to the intellectual and cultural evolution of the modern times. It is a discipline with its own concepts, its own object, and problems, and, what is the most important, with its own contributions in the field of the aesthetic science. \nThe main goal of environmental aesthetics is to educate a fully developed community that will live in harmony with the natural world.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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".