MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384942970 · doi:10.1002/9781119912262.ch5

Wittgenstein's Language‐Games of Education

2023· other· en· W4384942970 on OpenAlexaff
Jeff Stickney

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicWittgensteinian philosophy and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertaintyEpistemologyTransformative learningSet (abstract data type)GrammarPhilosophySociologyComputer scienceLinguisticsPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ludwig Wittgenstein's later philosophy often depicts cases of teaching and learning, as well as anthropological thought-experiments, to ‘dispense the fog’ on conceptual matters confounding thought: techniques in his Philosophical Investigations for gaining a perspicuous view of grammar. In Wittgenstein's later work On Certainty , ‘knowing’ is something allowing for learning and also correction, different from having certainties taken-in without formal learning and beyond expressions of doubt or belief. In this chapter, the author investigates Wittgenstein's more complex picture of learning in On Certainty by exploring usage of educational terms set against the backdrop of his post-foundational epistemology. He briefly consider Wittgenstein's remarks on “systems of verification”, not formally learnt while investigating problems in climate-change education: a combination of now standard “systems theory” in environmental science with diverse forms of “transformative pedagogy”.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWittgensteinian philosophy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207