Defending education and scholarship in the Classical Greek Era : pragmatist motifs in the works of Plato (c420-348BCE) and Isocrates (c436-338BCE) / Robert Prus.
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
As a broader realm of human endeavor and communication, education seems as fundamental as human group life itself. However, liberal education and scholarly ventures are much more problematic and fragile features of community life. Still, a liberal education is not the same as scholarship and some important distinctions are made between these two realms of activity prior to considering the ways in which they are envisioned and defended by two classical Greek authors Plato and Isocrates. Although both Plato (c420-348BCE) and Isocrates (c436-338BCE) were students of Socrates (c469-399BCE) and share an emphasis on the importance of knowing, their approaches to human knowing and acting are notably different. Clearly, Plato's depictions of education and scholarship are considerably more extensive and are philosophically as well as theologically more engaging. Likewise, Plato has had vastly more impact on Western social thought than has Isocrates. Still, Isocrates addresses education and scholarship in distinctively more pluralist and humanly engaged terms. Following an examination of Plato's analysis of education and his defense of scholarship as these are addressed in Republic, Laws, and Charmides, attention is given to Isocrates‟ defense of educational ventures. Notably, Isocrates defends education and scholarship from the positions that Plato and (his principal spokesperson) Socrates promote, as well as from the ignorance and disregard of the community at large.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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