MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242544932 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10999

Erotic Economics: Metaphysical Foundations in Three Platonic Dialogues

2015· dissertation· en· W4242544932 on OpenAlexaff
Justin S. Campbell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphysicsVirtueSoulEpistemologyContext (archaeology)PoliticsDimension (graph theory)ConventionProperty (philosophy)PhilosophyThe RepublicReading (process)SociologySocial sciencePolitical scienceLawHistoryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reading the arguments of the Meno, the Republic, and the Symposium within their mytho-historical context, this thesis proposes that there is an essentially economic dimension to Plato's moral and political thought.By articulating a fuller and more nuanced account of the role of property in achieving Platonic virtue, conceived of here as a kind of activity that is inherently practical in nature, this thesis suggests alternative resolutions to a number of philosophical problems, including the apparent oppositions between nature and convention, the body and the soul, the individual and the city, and the material and immaterial realms. ForMy more valiant and intelligent other half, In whose name I have endured long and sacrificed much. Virtus Vindicat.What if Earth Be but the shadow of Heav'n, and things therein Each to other like, more than on Earth is thought?

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.061
Scholarly communication0.0120.015
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207