Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interpreter of Schelling faces a particularly difficult hermeneutical challenge: as soon as Schelling had developed a workable theoretical frame (say naturephilosophy or identity-philosophy), he seems to have abandoned it.Schelling appears to have been repulsed by the prospect of settling down into a system, as though the real always beckoned to him from the far side of whatever set of categories were recommending themselves, compelling him to leave for others the provisional paradigm he had constructed while he continued his restless search for the logical and historical relation between the infinite and the finite.For Heidegger, Schelling's flagrant disregard for the canons of consistency and coherence is not a sign of the weakness of his thought, but exactly the opposite: genuine thinking, according to Heidegger, never enjoys arrival, certainty, or stability.2 Schelling's surface inconsistencies notwithstanding, we can discern a set of recurring concerns in Schelling's collected works, leitmotifs, which do not a system make, but constitute a style of philosophizing which we can call Schellingian.First in appearance is a theme most characteristic of Schelling's nature-philosophy, but which also plays a central role in the philosophy of freedom and returns in the Trinitarian metaphysics of the late lectures: the notion of polarity.Schelling remains convinced, from his earliest treatises to his last lectures, that all intelligible structure, mental or material, physical or metaphysical, finite or divine, is characterized by polarity, opposition, and the creative and dynamic tension between incommensurables, a tension which must not be abrogated in a spurious logic that presumes to deny the principle of contradiction (Hegel's).The production of being in Schellingian ontology is not by means of Hegel's qualitative differentiation, the collapse of the identical into the play of contradictories and the subsequent negation of and re-inscription of difference 1 Some of the contents of this introductory essay first appeared in S.J. McGrath, The Dark Ground of Spirit: Schelling and the Unconscious (London: Routledge, 2012), 2-11.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".