MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133053968

Heidegger's Nietzsche: European Modernity and the Philosophy of the Future

2016· dissertation· W7133053968 on OpenAlexafffund
JosĂŠ Daniel Parra

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2016
Typedissertation
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsModernityHermeneuticsInterpretation (philosophy)PoliticsTeleologyContext (archaeology)OntologyPolitical philosophyTransformative learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dissertation offers a study of two key figures in the history of political philosophy. By way of a textual interpretation of Martin Heidegger’s reading of Friedrich Nietzsche, it attempts to draw renewed attention to the question of ontology in the history of political thought. The discussion unfolds in the context of an epochal change and transition in European culture that in Heidegger’s interpretation of Nietzsche is in the process of teleological “fulfillment.” The text examines the sources of this potentially transformative event, with special emphasis on the contrast between the modern predominance of Cartesian inter-subjectivity and a manner of thought that dwells in the philosophical anthropology of classical Greek culture. The dissertation partakes in the Platonic-Aristotelian tradition of studying political science from architectonic perspectives, thereby highlighting the key comparative importance of philosophical “vision.” In that spirit, the thesis proposes to study an encounter between Heidegger and Nietzsche at the interstice between hermeneutics and contemporary political theory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel→French-language works237,207→