MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404470549 · doi:10.5840/symposium202428220

Anxiety as Theme of an Alternative History of Philosophy: A Glimpse into the Monograph Anxiety: A Philosophical History

2024· article· en· W4404470549 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bettina Bergo

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Philosophies and Pedagogies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyTheme (computing)PsychologyPsychoanalysisEpistemologyPsychotherapistPhilosophyPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article offers an overview of my 2020 study, Anxiety: A Philo-sophical History. I discuss the philosophers and theorists examined, and show how anxiety, understood in German as Angst (it has but one term for this affect), moved through Idealism from a largely noxious state (Kant) into the role of an emotion-adjuvant of reason (Hegel), into the sign of imminent birth—of nature (Schelling). I focus on the existential turn given anxiety, as a “state” prior to freedom in Kierkegaard, and draw from his work and Nietzsche’s a unique, affective dialectic. The 20th century opens with Husserl’s “genetic” concern with passivity and affective forces, Heidegger’s “attunements,” and Freud’s perplexity over the meaning of anxiety. Levinas closes the work, considering the intersubjectivity of feelings and its implications for lived time and human interrelationality. Cet article propose un aperçu de mon ouvrage de 2020, Anxiety: A Philosophical History. J’examine la pensée des théoriciens qui y sont étudiés et montre comment la signi􀏔ication de l’anxiété évolue, depuis celle d’un état essentiellement nocif (Kant) à celle de la nais-sance imminente de la nature ou d’un Dieu-Tout (Schelling), en passant par un rôle d’auxiliaire au travail de la raison (Hegel). Je m’attarde par la suite sur le tournant existentialiste d’un Kierke-gaard qui présente l’anxiété comme un état instable précédant la liberté et, sur fond de sa pensée et de celle de Nietzsche, je retire une dialectique singulière, affective. Le XXe siècle s’ouvre sur le volet génétique de la phénoménologie de Husserl, sur son intérêt pour les affektive Kräfte à l’oeuvre dans la mémoire, à la suite de quoi je dis-cute des Stimmungen de Heidegger puis des perplexités freudiennes quant aux multiples sens de l’Angst. J’aborde 􀏔inalement la pensée de Levinas en clôture de mon livre, lui qui interroge l’intersubjectivité des affects et ses implications pour notre expé-rience de la responsabilité relationnelle.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposiumSame topicEducational Philosophies and PedagogiesFrench-language works237,207