Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kant's glorification of "autonomy" may have helped fertilize the prevalent contemporary educational focus on nurturing individual instrumental reasoning-which, it will be argued, diminishes autonomy, since the sort of "objective" reasoning of which Kant speaks requires the "bias-neutralizing" power of reasoning with others.Following an analysis of how the emergence of self-consciousness creates a space for a sense of freedom of choice and the drive to excel, it will be argued, referring to Kant's pre-critical work, that self-creating self-legislation requires independence from both the determining force of our natural inclinations and our drive to excel, and that an education for this dual independence requires that educators shift the focus from trying to make individuals smart, to trying to create "smart spaces" of communal inquiry with the goal of anchoring the recognition that engaging in reasoned dialogue with those of differing viewpoints in the only route to "Deep Agency."
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".