Notice bibliographique
Résumé
How do we know that we are in the presence of the sacred?This question has occupied religious thinkers and thinkers about religion for thousands of years.Until recently, those discussions have taken place within the context that the sacred is real; that while it may require extraordinary circumstances to "know" the sacred, few would have disputed the existence of a Being greater than ourselves.As both authors point out, many people today doubt the existence of the sacred.Still others are merely indifferent to the possibility.This book represents the work of two authors who have taken different paths to come to the same conclusion: the sacred is still a significant part of the lives of people in the modern world.In order to reach this conclusion, both authors have also grappled with the similarities and differences between spirituality and religion, acknowledging that either can serve as a positive or negative force in human lives.Both authors claim that we need to have a relationship with the sacred in order to achieve a deeper sense of ourselves as part of a unity.That unity encompasses our sense of the self as it relates to our bodies, our social world, our environment and the metaphysical realm.Both authors also work within the framework of spirituality and healing, making the argument that the appreciation of the sacred can promote the process of achieving inner balance between our emotions and our intellect, and help us heal when that inner balance has been disrupted.When we open ourselves to the possibility of the sacred, both authors argue, we can find sources of hope to our despair that may be caused by political, cultural, or personal problems.The driving passion for the authors is to demonstrate that the sacred has both a presence and a healing power in our society, and that we need to be open to that reality.The reason that we so often are unable to recognize the existence of the sacred is because we have accepted the argument that science and technology are the hallmark of modern thought and both negate the possibility of the sacred.The arguments in this volume present the point of view that science and technology cannot take the place of the sacred, although they can co-exist with the sacred.The two authors approach their arguments from different disciplines and employ different material in their discourse.Constantin Ponomareff brings to our attention great works of literature, music and art as examples of artists who have recognized that "in this existential experience of our spirituality, we may finally come to a deeper and humbler understanding of our place in the universe."Precisely through works of art can we truly appreciate the way in which the sacred functions in our lives.In my view, Ponomareff bases his discussion of art and the sacred on Jungian psychology, and in particular, Carl Gustav Jung's notion that we can
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,002 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».