MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128250686 · doi:10.12957/mnemosine.2020.57671

Nietzsche, clínica e autogenealogia: um movimento de intercessão entre Nietzsche e o modelo clínico da modernidade

2020· article· pt· W3128250686 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Menezes Oliveira, Karina Acosta Camargo

Bibliographic record

VenueMnemosine · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanitiesPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente trabalho intenta apontar um movimento de intercessão entre o pensamento de Friedrich Nietzsche e a atividade clínica. Tal aproximação e troca se justifica tanto em função da singular interpretação do filósofo a respeito do sofrimento e do adoecimento ao longo de sua obra, quanto de sua aproximação da atividade clínica quando este busca diagnosticar e transformar diversos aspectos considerados doentes na modernidade. Apresentou-se uma crítica genealógica da emergência dos valores do modelo clínico da modernidade, buscando identificar expressões da “vontade de verdade” em tal modelo em contraposição ao pensamento de Nietzsche. Propôs-se, então, pesquisar na obra de Nietzsche e de comentadores alguns conceitos, tais como grande razão, grande saúde, eterno retorno, transvaloração de todos os valores e autogenealogia, que corroborassem com a produção de um modelo clínico distante de preconceitos morais. Conclui-se relevante e possível indicar um movimento de intercessão entre o pensamento de Nietzsche e a atividade clínica.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.028
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueMnemosineSame topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and HegelFrench-language works237,207