Bibliographic record
Abstract
<JATS1:p>This book is available as open access through the Bloomsbury Open programme and is available on www.bloomsburycollections.com.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>By utilizing the philosophy of Giorgio Agamben, the authors propose a radical reconceptualization of the practice known as Philosophy for Children (P4C) that focuses on the experience of one’s potentiality to speak rather than the development of specific skills or types of speaking. 'Philosophy for Infancy' (P4I) emerges as a non-instrumental educational practice that does not dictate what to say or how to say it but rather focuses on the potentiality to say something. In the process of developing P4I, the authors address a long-standing question concerning the politics of education. Instead of education as a means to a pre-defined political end (citizenship education, for example) or education as an end in itself (divorced from political concerns), the authors argue that the non-instrumental approach to potentiality is the embodiment of an equally non-instrumental political community that is itself always in potential. P4I is intended to work within the procedural framework offered by the P4C-program and recognizes a latent potentiality in the practice that allows for a common use of language. Throughout the theoretical discussion, the authors offer practical applications and excerpts of children’s dialogue to provide anchoring points for classroom teachers.</JATS1:p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".