Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new edition of Conducting Hermeneutic Research: From Philosophy to Practice (Moules et al., 2015) is on the way from the original four authors, with the addition of Professor Ted George adding his knowledge and expertise in hermeneutic philosophy.I have been working on the two chapters of philosophical background.Doing so has been a reminder of how the book and this journal both arose from the stimulating dialogues of the Canadian Hermeneutic Institute, and that all three operate in the space of "applied hermeneutics" -understood as relating ideas from hermeneutic philosophy to the concerns and processes of research in practice disciplines such as nursing and education.In revising the text with this in mind, the biggest change I made to the chapter about Gadamer's philosophical concepts has been to add a section on "die Sache selbst," the matter itself, or in research terms usually the topic.I wanted to add an emphasis about die Sache as a prompt that what lies at the heart of applied hermeneutics is a matter in the world, in the double of sense of something real, solid, and of something that matters, that has actual effects in people's lives.Here is part of my draft for the section in the second edition of the book which is due to be published later this year.Understanding is always about something that pulls us towards the world and invites interpretation in order to make sense of it (George, 2020).The German word Sache can be translated as matter, in the sense of "the matter at hand," or in terms of research, a topic.George (2020) takes up Figal's "realistic hermeneutics" (George, 2020, p. 16) to emphasize the substantiveness of hermeneutic understanding, which is brought about in the first instance by our encounters with something that is outside of ourselves, that "stands over
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.025 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.009 |
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".