Poetic justice: the paradox of Plato as poet and its implications for a defense of literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is a defense of poetry as a mode of thought. It is intended to be a corroborating document for the work of other apologists for poetry like Sir Philip Sidney and Percy Bysshe Shelley. The thesis attempts to establish that Plato, as legislator, ie. political philosopher, is an unacknowledged poet. Proceeding from Stephen Pepper's theory of world hypotheses, in which he legitimizes non-empirical data as evidence, the thesis analyzes Plato's Republic as a literary work, thus setting in tension Plato's pronouncements against poetry and Plato's literary achievement in the Republic as illustrative of his own appropriation of the very art he would banish. Plato's dual identity as philosopher-poet becomes an exemplar that serves to advocate for the educational value of poetry in terms that skeptics about poetry's educational value can apprehend and appreciate.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.100 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".