MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Eliminativism, Dialetheism, and Moore’s Paradox

2023· book-chapter· en· W4377031492 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John Williams

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEpistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of CambridgeSingapore Management UniversityMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociaux
KeywordsAssertionIrrational numberAbsurdityPhilosophyEpistemologyAbsurdismSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Chapter 13 considers the case of Ellie, an eliminativist about mental states like belief who makes assertions such as ‘It is raining but I do not believe that it is raining.’ According to John Turri, Ellie’s assertion is neither unreasonable nor absurd, if the sincerity of her assertion requires her to believe its content. A commissive counterpart of Ellie is Di, a dialetheist who asserts or believes, ‘The Russell set includes itself but I believe that it is not the case that the Russell set includes itself.’ It is argued that neither Ellie’s assertion nor her belief is irrational yet both are absurd. Likewise neither Di’s assertion nor her belief is irrational, yet in contrast neither is absurd. Thus not all Moore-paradoxical assertions or beliefs are irrational, and the syntax of Moore’s examples is not sufficient for the absurdity found in them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.138 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEpistemology, Ethics, and MetaphysicsFrench-language works237,207