MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188967624 · doi:10.3968/12176

Karl Popper’s Criticism of Totalitarianism in Plato’s The Republic

2021· article· en· W3188967624 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chang Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyEpistemologyIdeologyDemocracyCriticismEssentialismContext (archaeology)Economic JusticeState (computer science)PoliticsSociologyLawPolitical scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plato considers the original or most primitive form of society is closest to the form or concept of a state. It is the best state and it is ruled by the most intelligent and sacred people. But Moral degradation causes political corruption and produces a series of vicious chain reactions. Plato’s The Republic is the embodiment of his totalitarian thought. This reflects Plato’s disappointment with the Athenian democracy. Because of his disappointment, he turned his attention to oligarchy and totalitarianism, trying to find a starting point for solidification and finding the unchangeable form of idea. In the context of modern society, Popper criticizes Plato’s view of justice based on his ideology from the perspective of humanism, and he constructs his special view against historical determinism by criticizing Plato’s claim. Generally speaking, Plato’s political philosophy tends to be totalitarian, but his essentialist method is valuable in the field of sociological research, which can help us identify those things that are essentially the same in the changing historical course.

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)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.030
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207