MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Eco a Vattimo – negatívny realizmus verzus slabé myslenie

2021· article· sk· W3167759820 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Martin Vašek

Bibliographic record

VenueFilozofia · 2021
Typearticle
Languagesk
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Ecology, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill UniversityState University of New York
KeywordsPhilosophyEpistemologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper intends to introduce main points of Eco's critique of Vattimo's philosophy. It focuses on differences in their approaches and provides a closer view of one of the philosophical discussions happening at the wake of the new millennium. We focus on understanding reality and the limits of interpretation as the two key points of Eco's consideration and criticism. In 1983, Umberto Eco participated in publishing the well-known volume "weak thought", although he later no longer considered himself part of the philosophical initiative. He represents a position of minimal or negative realism. Gianni Vattimo is a proponent of the "weak thought", where reality is not introduced as stable, natural or objective. Reality does not itself speak out but needs a spokesmen or motivated interpreters. Vattimo, therefore revives Nietzsche's thought "There are no facts, only interpretations", which he deploys further in his own way.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.293 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFilozofiaSame topicReligion, Ecology, and EthicsFrench-language works237,207