Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key element of J.S. Russell’s intellectual oeuvre is his concern with perfectionism, the philosophical position which holds that the expression of uniquely human capacities is the source of moral value. One of the main axes of criticism of perfectionism is its inherent elitism: not all humans are equally efficacious or efficient capacity catalyzers, and thus on perfectionist grounds it makes sense to identify those who are unable to express a large range or depth of capacities as less valuable (in this specific sense of value) than those who are not. I take one of the main themes of Russell’s philosophical output to be a gentle and steady movement toward redressing perfectionist’s elitist bent through broadening what we count as virtues, and thereby democratizing the perfectionist position by making it more inclusive and accessible. I trace this development of Russell’s interest from his valorization of self-actualization through partaking in dangerous sport (accessible to very few of us), to his valorization of striving through gameplay and sport (accessible to the majority of us), and finally to his valorization of idleness (accessible to almost everyone). I assess whether Russell’s overall project succeeds in its apparent aim to rehabilitate perfectionism upon democratic lines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".