MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122133915

Schelling’s Late Political Philosophy: Lectures 22-24 of the Presentation of the Purely Rational Philosophy

2020· article· en· W3122133915 on OpenAlexaff
Kyla Bruff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy and Historical Thought
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical philosophyPhilosophyRevelationEpistemologyMythologyPresentation (obstetrics)PoliticsModern philosophyExtension (predicate logic)ClassicsLiteratureTheologyHistoryLawArtComputer sciencePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From approximately 1847 until the end of his life in 1854, Schelling wrote on a range of philosophical topics with the ultimate goal of explicating a purely rational philosophy, particularly as it relates to mythology, religion and revelation. The notes and fragments from this period were assembled by Schelling’s son, K.F.A. Schelling, in a collection of 24 lectures known as the Presentation of the Purely Rational Philosophy. While the importance of this work for the development of Schelling’s negative and positive philosophy is well-known, the significance of the political content which appears near the end of the lecture series has been largely ignored. This could be in part attributable to the heavy hand that K.F.A had in composing the final lecture of the series. Specifically, Lecture 24, in which Schelling gives his final word on the state and the monarchy, was written based on fragments but also on conversations that K.F.A. and his brother Hermann had had with their father.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland)Same topicPhilosophy and Historical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207