Musical judgement: aesthetics and jurisprudence in Plato
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation turns to Plato's writings on music and the law in order to delimit the relationship between the aesthetic and juridical dimensions of political order, and in particular, to show how these dimensions are manifested in citizens and are constitutive of political judgment.The central claim of my thesis is that for Plato, justice requires an affective attachment that, in turn, requires it be coextensive with a kind of musical beauty.In order for the conditions of justice to obtain, we must not only define justice, we must also desire it as we do the beautiful; this affective requirement is fulfilled by the musical dimension of the law.The ancients understood law and music to share in the same intrinsic properties of order, establishment and restoration; the ambiguity of the word nomos, which could mean both song and law, underscores this worldview according to which ethics and aesthetics are governed by the same principles.In Plato, musical desire works within this framework: music engenders in the soul a pre-rational cognitive recognition of the intrinsic order that constitutes its beauty; musical inspiration, in turn, provides the motive force for active juridical citizenship.Surprisingly little scholarly attention has been paid to Plato's treatment of music and few scholars treat Plato as committed to the rule of law.I show that Plato's attention to both music and law throughout the dialogues underscores the political importance of an aesthetic education that is also juridical; the pedagogical function of the law is to cultivate a civic ethos in which citizens are passionately engaged with, inspired by, and take ultimate pleasure in, the principles of justice.This dissertation would not have been possible without the love and support of some extraordinary people.I am deeply grateful to Frederick Davidson, who changed the course of my life, and made the path to this PhD possible, and to my grandparents, Anna and Andrzej Nowakowski, who were alive to see the beginning of all of this and are in my heart here at the end.I am profoundly
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".