Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter investigates Canadian poet Peter Sanger’s ecological thinking as expressed in an essay titled Oikos and argues that, at a time of alarming environmental degradation that is seriously compromising the habitability of the Earth, it is wise to listen closely to poet-thinkers’ lessons on the moral imperative to protect the Earth. Sanger is not alone in thinking of the biosphere as a fragile place that needs our attention and respect. Rather, he is part of a long tradition sensitive to the vitality and livingness of the Earth that comprises the pre-Socratic poet-philosophers, the ancient Chinese poets and Buddhist sages, the Transcendentalists R. W. Emerson and H. D. Thoreau, Martin Heidegger, Aldo Leopold, Freya Mathews, David Abram, Jane Bennett, and a host of contemporary ecopoets and thinkers intent on denouncing the shameless exploitation of the planet, our shared home, with different degrees of belligerence and explicitness. Embracing a “non-anthropocentric humanism” (Iovino), they claim that there is another way to live on Earth, that is, with a sense of duty and responsibility.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".