MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Search for Ourselves in the Universe: A Review of “Contingency and Convergence: Toward a Cosmic Biology of Body and Mind”

2021· review· en· W3180693009 on OpenAlexafffund
Letitia Meynell

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophy Theory and Practice in Biology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsCOSMIC cancer databaseConvergence (economics)UniverseContingencyAstronomyPhysicsTheoretical physicsAstrophysicsEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2020) new book, Contingency and Convergence: Toward a Cosmic Biology of Body and Mind, argues that universal biological laws, evidenced by convergent evolution, produce humanlike consciousness, not just on Earth but throughout the universe, while maintaining that aspects of human cognition are nonetheless unique. Drawing from Stephen Jay Gould's account of the contingency of evolution, against which he contrasts his view, I argue that Powell exemplifies a troubling anthropocentrism that Gould flatly denounces. Further, I argue that this anthropocentrism leads Powell to make implausible claims about other animal minds and the likelihood of human-like consciousness on planets other than our own.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophy Theory and Practice in BiologySame topicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial LifeFrench-language works237,207