Aesthetic Experience in Self-identifying Perspective
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reveals the relationship between individual self-awareness, an aesthetic attitude to reality, and art. The basis of the study of their relationship is the analysis of empirical self- consciousness or everyday consciousness, which differs from the pure self-consciousness presented in the classical philosophical tradition. Consideration of features of worldview construction in everyday life and aesthetic orientation of everyday consciousness allows, on the one hand, the reconsideration of the role of art in the formation of personality, and on the other hand, the revelation of the illusory nature of the classical view of the “I” as a monolithic, substantial unity. Contemporary art in particular stimulates us to play with images of the “I,” but at the same time it teaches us to keep distance between game situations and what is constitutive in relation to the “I,” allowing us to consolidate an integral image of ourselves in personality. Art goes beyond museums, actively invades the world of everyday life, and elicits the question of how much we have mastered the “art of being ourselves.”
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it