The presence of Plato and the spectrum of Schopenhauer in Nietzsche’s lectures, On the Future of Our Educational Institutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nos hemos propuesto aquí resaltar dos referencias que subyacen al argumento de Nietzsche en su conferencia Sobre el futuro de nuestras instituciones educativas. El filósofocomparte con Platón y Schopenhauer una aristocracia natural del espíritu, es decir, la idea de que la naturaleza es tacaña en la producción de genios. En estas condiciones, es comprensibleque se sienta «asustado» por la «democratización» de la universidad que está presenciando. Mostramos, sin embargo, que enfrenta a Platón con Schopenhauer, pero no sigue al filósofo griego hasta el final. En primer lugar, Nietzsche destaca que lejos de creer que la universidad y la cultura deben estar al servicio del Estado, es el Estado el que debe estar al servicio de la Bildung, y es lo que surgiría del modelo platónico. Sostenemos que hay una especie de vacilación por parte de Nietzsche, que se pregunta si la institución todavía puede crear Bildung o si no es fuera donde debería buscarse y construirse, en cuyo caso estamos más cerca de Schopenhauer.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".