Konsep Kebebasan Menurut Will Kymlicka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article talks about Will Kymlicka's concept of freedom. It should be noted that the emergence of Kymlicka's idea of freedom is inseparable from his big theme of "Multiculturalism". Kymlicka defines multiculturalism so that everyone must be treated properly by looking at their rights, because everyone has freedom both individually and in groups that are reflected in culture. For this reason, the most basic thing emphasized by Kymlicka is freedom. What kind of freedom does she offer? Kymlicka divides freedom into liberalism and individual freedom. As well as freedom in the context of culture. Therefore, I see that in reality everyone, be it from ethnicity, race, and so on, has the same rights. Free to express their opinions without any pressure from any party or group. The emergence of this concept was caused by the injustice experienced by Canadian society at that time. The issue raised is how Kymlicka strives for equality in everyone individually, as well as in groups. This means that everyone must receive the same treatment without discriminating between one group and another. Freedom means that there is an attitude of acceptance within each individual. The author will discuss why Will Kymlicka sees freedom as one of the most concerned ideas, in impacting the cultures of each ethnic group, race and so on.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.012 |
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".