Aspect perception and rule‐following in Wittgenstein's <i>Philosophical Investigations</i>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper aims to highlight a distinctive, projective, mode of aspect perception within Wittgenstein's philosophy that has gone underappreciated in the scholarly literature. Although it bears a family resemblance to other instances of the phenomenon Wittgenstein describes as ‘noticing an aspect’ in PI Part II §113, it is distinctive in that it involves not only ‘seeing’ a pattern but also ‘projecting’ the pattern to subsequent cases of application. One reason it is important to highlight this projective mode of aspect perception is that it plays a critical role within Wittgenstein's rule‐following considerations. Confusions arise, such as those associated with the analysis of arithmetical infinity characteristic of Russellian Platonism, when philosophers adopt metaphysical misinterpretations of this ‘projective’ mode of aspect perception. By reflecting on this mode of aspect perception in association with rule‐following, Wittgenstein aims to dispel such confusions.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it