UMA INTERROGAÇÃO ACERCA DA RELAÇÃO ENTRE A FILOSOFIA E AS MULHERES NA UNIVERSIDADE
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to outline the incidence of the gender perspective in the teaching of philosophy at undergraduate courses in Brazilian public universities. For this, we surveyed teaching programs in the subjects of philosophy courses of 15 universities. We created 04 categories for the analysis of these discipline programs, which develop on the following axes: the question about the teaching/presentation of women philosophers; on the teaching/presentation of themes worked by feminist philosophy in history - both as a central and secondary theme in the programmatic contents - and on bibliographic references recommended in these programs that contemplate philosophical and scientific women works. We conclude that the area of philosophy is still resistant to the study or even reading of the philosophical production performed by women. The philosophical discourse consolidated in academia has been reproduced, in most times, by an eminently masculine speech, willing to think the world indifferent to the participation of women. We suggest that the way this knowledge is structured and organized - as abstract, universal, and neutral - makes it difficult for gender issues to enter the official philosophical debate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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 it