Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the several decades I have been giving talks abroad on pragmatism and editing a quarterly in this area of scholarship, I have witnessed a remarkable growth in interest in American philosophy outside the USA.Although even in the 1960s there was much more knowledge of the history of American philosophy among non-American scholars than is commonly recognized (Germany, France, the Soviet Union, Canada and Great Britain were notable examples), no one can doubt that the publication in 1979 of Richard Rorty's Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature accelerated this growth.One of the chief reasons that Rorty's work greatly increased interest in pragmatism abroad was that his publications moved pragmatist philosophy for the first time into several of America's most prestigious universities.Only in the 1980s did pragmatism acquire a "bully pulpit" in the most prestigious universities of a nation that economically, militarily and culturally enjoyed global hegemony.Although this hegemony is, for obvious reasons, troubling, it has led to there being more scholars with expertise in pragmatism scattered around the globe outside the U.S. than there are inside the country.The essays contributed to this volume are impressive examples of this worldwide scholarship.The organizers of the Central European Pragmatist Forum are especially to be congratulated for nurturing pragmatist philosophy that is genuinely criticalcritical of pragmatism as well as of other philosophical outlooks.Selfcorrection is in the spirit of classical pragmatism.My hope is that this pragmatist correction will continue to be a mutual one between American philosophers and pragmatists outside the U .S, that cultural imperialism will not prevent American philosophers from learning as much from philosophers in other countries as the latter learn from their American colleagues.Certainly we Americans have much to learn from philosophers abroad.For example, philosophers in Western, Central and Eastern Europe are more in touch with the worlds of literature and the arts than philosophers in the U.S. Partly as a consequence of that fact, in Europe philosophy is a far more powerful cultural force than it is in the U.S. I urge our pragmatist brethren outside the U.S., including those whose work is included in this book, to aid their American colleagues in enriching the pragmatist tradition.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.648 | 0.645 |
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".