MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401429743 · doi:10.15408/ref.v9i1.37045

Some Reflections on Philosophy, Democracy, and Religion

2007· article· en· W4401429743 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos Fraenkel

Bibliographic record

VenueRefleksi · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracySociologyReligious studiesPhilosophyEnvironmental ethicsSocial scienceLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the use of philosophy, especially in the present era? This article seeks to convince that philosophy is highly beneficial for human life. Philosophy does not merely speculate about abstract matters, as many people perceive, but since the time of Socrates, it has developed to be grounded and practical. Socrates brought philosophy into the public sphere, not confined to seminar rooms. From here, philosophical discussions emerged that touched various aspects of human life. Since then, philosophy has delved into radical and profound discussions on a wide range of topics, including democracy and religion.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.030
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRefleksiSame topicPolitical Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207