EL DERECHO NATURAL EN LA CONSTITUCIÓN POLÍTICA DE COLOMBIA, UNA VISIÓN DESDE LOS POSTULADOS DE JAVIER HERVADA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thematic plurality and the prolixity of the texts and acknowledgments that are integrated into the Political Constitution of Colombia of 1991 allow it to be studied and considered from different perspectives and criteria, both doctrinal and argumentative. On this occasion, we will proceed to demarcate those features of the constitutional text that allow us to highlight its correlation with the postulates that, regarding the theory of natural law, Javier Hervada has established. To achieve this objective, the criteria of a dialogical methodology will be used, through which it is possible to establish a kind of conversation between the constitutional texts and the postulates that Hervada expresses, which are typical of the so-called natural law. The method used in this research does not deviate from the methodology that will be used, since it corresponds to the dialogical criteria between texts, which will allow the construction of conceptual reasoning that denotes the conceptual identity between the Constitutional Charter and the principles of law. natural, expressed in the work of Hervada. With this paper we intend to address a conceptual problem that demands that the relationship of the criteria of a conceptual aspect of Law, such as Natural Law, be clarified from a theoretical perspective, with an apparently neutral text, in terms of what that it refers to its ideological source, such as the Political Constitution of Colombia, which in its practical development, and more in the evolution, which the judiciary has given it, has been valued from the criteria of legal positivism, of legal realism, and even from the orbit of ius-naturalism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".