MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404553056 · doi:10.1163/18722636-12341539

Training the Philosopher King: Ancient Models of Political Action in Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault

2024· article· en· W4404553056 on OpenAlexaff
William Tilleczek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Philosophy of History · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHannah Arendt's Political Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSOCRATESAction (physics)Relation (database)PoliticsAncient GreekPhilosophyEpistemologyAncient philosophyNarrativeMichel foucaultCivilizationPolitical actionSocratic methodSociologyLiteratureLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article offers a comparative study of Hannah Arendt’s and Michel Foucault’s “returns” to classical antiquity. I focus on their overlapping readings of Socrates as a “civilization trainer” and their divergent readings of Plato – who is for Foucault a trainer of kings and for Arendt a utopian engineer – to argue that both Arendt and Foucault draw from Greek antiquity a substantively underdetermined but politically choice worthy form of action: a courageous and critical relation to the present moment in which one lives, consisting of the public and philosophical critique of what we are thinking and doing. Without falling into nostalgic narratives about lost golden ages, they nonetheless retrieve Socratic ethical exemplarity for a (post)modern political theory that has lost interest in the game of building perfect regimes. I conclude by exploring the differences and overlaps in Foucault’s and Arendt’s vision of what is needed to revitalize political action today.

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 score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Philosophy of HistorySame topicHannah Arendt's Political PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207