MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046376058 · doi:10.3917/aphi.831.0009

Une philosophie du dire ( Sagen ) comme faire ( Tun )

2020· article· fr· W3046376058 on OpenAlex

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

VenueArchives de Philosophie · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophical and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’enjeu de cette étude est, une fois surmontée l’apparente faiblesse des vues fichtéennes sur le langage (partie I), de restituer leur cohérence et leur importance. La cohérence tout d’abord, qui nous fera passer d’une théorie de la désignation (le mot renvoyant à une chose indépendante) à une théorie de la signification comme effectuation (partie II). L’importance ensuite, puisqu’il sera alors loisible de comprendre comment au cœur du système fichtéen se trouve une théorie de l’énonciation, qui met en œuvre un principe fondamental, celui de l’accord entre le dire ( Sagen )et le faire ( Tun ) (Partie III). Pour l’établir, Fichte se livre à la fois à une critique serrée de l’illusion référentielle et à une critique de la représentation. Par là, sa philosophie se révèle être une philosophie du dire comme faire.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.186 · 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