Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In practicality same circumstances under which Christ was born, his dark brother, Antichrist, would be born, and he would work very much same miracles but in order to mankind. (1) C. G. Jung's statement, given during his five-year-long seminar on Zarathustra, may be extended to express parodic structure of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Out of travesty of Gospels Nietzsche's Antichrist is born to seduce mankind away from paleontological Christian eschatology and into new vision of Overman. Jung called tendency of any concept to give birth to its opposite enandiodromia. (2) same enandiodromic relationship exists between Nikos Kazantzakis's Last Temptation of Christ (3) and story of Jesus Christ as is revealed in New Testament. Both Nietzsche and Kazantzakis employ return to historical moral arena in which counter value-system was born. historical being, writes Mircea Eliade, man killed God, and after this assassination--this 'deicide'--he is forced to live exclusively in (4) In myth, time is reversible: a primordial mythical time made present. (5) In other words, mythological time attempts return back to indeterminable epoch in which things 'originated.' neo-historical modern era, however, is independent of sacred mythological time, and thus return to moment when hierophany (6) gains its meaning constitutes both deconstruction and fixing. death of God poses an enormous threat to life and its capacity for transcendence: Last Man--a modern nihilist. Both Last Temptation's and Zarathustra's return to arena of Christian morals aims to shudder its moral foundations as well as to provide process that overcomes nihilist attitude of Last Man. (7) In essence, both Last Temptation of Christ and Thus Spoke Zarathustra are statements of what we may call historic To clarify this point we first need to understand relationship between myth and history as well as Nietzsche's perception of history. Similar to Nietzsche, Mircea Eliade places history before myth. The historical event in itself, he writes, however important, does not remain in popular nor does its recollection kindle poetic imagination save insofar as particular historical event closely approaches mythical model. (8) One should note at this point importance of what Nietzsche termed mnemotechnics in process of mythologization. In second essay of his Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche discusses in detail importance of memory in emergence of particular morality. If something is to stay in memory, he writes, it must be burned in: only that which never ceases to hurt stays in memory. (9) As an intricate part of mythology is indicative of certain morality that reflects value system of particular society. However, only hurts when this value system is of strict good vs. evil morality. (10) Nevertheless, Eliade perceives the memory of collective as unhistorical: the memory of historical events is modified, after two or three centuries, in such way that can enter into mold of archaic mentality, which cannot accept what is individual and preserves only what is exemplary. This reduction of events to categories and of individuals to archetypes, carried out by consciousness of popular strata in Europe almost down to our day, is performed in conformity with archaic ontology. We might say that popular memory restores to historical personage of modern times its meaning as imitator of archetype and reproducer of archetypal gestures.... (11) tendency to perceive history and mythology as opposites is apparent. History is irreversible and new; Mythology is primordial and archaic. memory does not preserve history--myth does. Is mythology then possible in modern unhistorical era? …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».