Bibliographic record
Abstract
U radu razmatram filozofijsku poziciju Alberta Bazale, za koju predlažem obuhvatan naziv »umjereni iracionalizam«. Naime, nastojim pokazati kako je Bazala za »metalogički korijen filozofije« koristio različite izraze, pa se time nameću i nazivi različiti od »voluntarističkog aktivizma«, kako se običava nazivati stajalište tog filozofa. Isto tako, tvrdim da je njegov projekt primarno negativan, u smislu da mu je cilj prije svega pružiti otpor isključivo intelektualističkom poimanju svijesti i svijeta. Kako bih opravdao umjerenost Bazalina iracionalizma, upućujem na mjesta na kojim Bazala ističe ulogu i nužnost razuma i logike u filozofijskoj i znanstvenoj spoznaji. Pritom ipak naglašavam kako se za Bazalu u osnovi sveg duhovnog života nalaze izvanrazumski faktori, bez kojih čovjeku zapravo i nema autentične egzistencije. Bazalinu umjerenost u iracionalizmu potkrepljujem i usporedbom njegove filozofije s onom L. E. J. Brouwera, osnivača matematičkog intuicionizma. Tvrdim kako se Bazalino stajalište dade jasno distingvirati od Brouwerova, pri čem je potonji kudikamo radikalniji u svom otporu razumu. Cilj je rada doprinijeti blagonaklonijem poimanju iracionalizma i pokazati kako otpor intelektualnom ne mora nužno značiti sumanutost ili proizvoljnost, već naprotiv, da može predstavljati i koherentnu, ali i živu, životnu i životvornu poziciju, čega je primjer upravo Bazalina filozofija.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.002 |
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".