MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Aesthetic Life and Why It Matters

2022· book· en· W4212974071 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEmbodied and Extended Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubjectivismAestheticsValue (mathematics)Context (archaeology)Aesthetic experienceIdeologyObjectivismTask (project management)Function (biology)Aesthetic valueEpistemologySociologyPsychologySocial psychologyArtPhilosophyPolitical scienceComputer scienceHistoryPoliticsEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Following an introduction that sketches an inclusive conception of the domain of the aesthetic, that sets out the task of the book to explain how aesthetic engagement can contribute to well-being or living meaningfully, and that uses a variant on Nozick’s Experience Machine thought experiment to question whether the task can be performed by identifying the aesthetic value with hedonic value, three proposals are offered. Aesthetic engagement is a site for achievement. It cultivates individuality within a context of community. It satisfies a hunger for exploring benign value differences. A closing dialogue among the three authors makes explicit the implications of their proposals for our understanding of disagreement, subjectivism, ethnocentrism, fads and fashions, and the ideological function of aesthetic life.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbodied and Extended CognitionFrench-language works237,207