MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361212597 · doi:10.1163/26669773-bja10045

Dialogue, Dasein, and Destiny: Heidegger’s Challenge to Dialogical Comparative Political Theory

2023· article· en· W4361212597 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Berk

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Political Theory · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Theory and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogical selfPoliticsPluralism (philosophy)ModernityDemocracyEpistemologySociologyDestiny (ISS module)PhilosophyGreeksPolitical scienceLawHistoryClassics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article critically assesses the influence of Heidegger on the “dialogical” school of comparative political theory, and in particular the writings of Fred Dallmayr. In response to dialogical cpt ’s employment of Heidegger in service of democratic, egalitarian, and cosmopolitan ends, this article reconstructs Heidegger’s own projects of intercultural dialogue as attempts to awaken the inegalitarian political-spiritual potential of elect nations, such as the Germans, Greeks, and Japanese against the tide of liberal modernity. Contra Dallmayr, the article analyzes the political unity of Heidegger’s treatment of “authentic” intercultural dialogues in his speeches and lectures from 1933–34, his 1941–2 lecture courses on Hölderlin, and his semi-fictional dialogue between a German “Inquirer” and “Japanese” in the 1950s. It outlines the existence of an illiberal Heideggerian cpt and concludes that dialogical cpt scholars should reconceive of their dialogue with Heidegger as one with an “other” to the egalitarian pluralism that they seek to promote.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.241
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative Political TheorySame topicCritical Theory and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207