Three grades of self involvement and the deduction of objectivity in <i>The Practical Self</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Does self-consciousness entail objectivity, that the subject of self-consciousness is related to a mind-independent world? Anil Gomes, in his elegant and thought-provoking book, The Practical Self, gives a new and absorbing account - a contemporary “deduction” - of how objectivity follows from self-consciousness. According to Gomes, the self-conscious subject must assent to the claim that she, herself, is the agent of her thinking. Further this assent by the self-conscious subject is sustained by a relation to a community of subjects, also agents, holding one another responsible for their thinking. Gomes's idea is that this relation to others is a relation to a mind-independent world. I do not argue against Gomes, but instead, pushing further in the same direction, argue that the self-conscious subject must also dissent from the claim that she herself is an object. I also ask about how Gomes's deduction amounts to a deduction of objectivity. Here I offer Gomes another way to think about objectivity and how his deduction of a relation between the self-conscious subject and a community of subjects constitutes a deduction of objectivity.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".