MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oedipus Rex: Fate, Truth and Self-will

2009· article· en· W1534725615 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yue-hua Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHEROMeaning (existential)LiteratureMythologyMoralityCharacter (mathematics)Theme (computing)ArtHumanitiesEpistemologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The myth of Sophocles’s Oedipus Rex is revolved on the three interactive perspectives of fate, truth and self-will, making the play a most remarkable one in the fifth century Greece when all the plays focused on the manifestation of God’s will under which man’s behavior was undoubtedly directed. What gives the play its tragic intensity is not the horror it arouses of patricide or incest but the meaning of fate that God bestows to Oedipus in his endeavor of truth seeking. What’s most important, it is the sentimental self-will of Oedipus that makes the play distinguished from other plays during the age of Sophocles’ and makes him an outstanding figure in the fifth century Greek. Though Sophocles’ plays could not detach themselves from the influence of religious requirement, namely, the divine will, a theme prevailing during his age, he endeavors to present a comparatively different approach of morality, a refusal to compromise of the hero’s fate confined by god in literary works of the fifth century Greece. It seems that Sophocles employs the oracles not for the sake of worshipping the Gods, but rather, for the presentation of man’s inner strength seeking truths about the conditions of life or about human character based on truth. Key words: fate, truth-seeking, self-will, oracle Resume: Le mystere d’Oedipus Rex de Sophocles reside dans les trois perspectives interactives : destin,verite et entetement, qui rendent ce drame l’un des plus remarquables du XVe siecle de la Grece ou toutes les pieces se consacraient a manifester la volonte de Dieu par laquelle le comportement de l’homme etait incontestablement guide. Ce qui donne a cette piece son intensite tragique, ce n’est pas la horreur de parricide ou d’inceste, mais le sens du destin que Dieu accorde a Oedipus dans sa recherche de verite. Ce qui est le plus important, c’est l’entetement sentimental d’Oedipus qui distingue cette piece des autre de l’epoque de Sophocles et le rend la plus celebre figure du XVe siecle de la Grece. Bien que les pieces de Sophocles ne puissent se detacher de l’influence de la demande religieuse, a savoir la volonte divine- un theme predominant de l’epoque, le dramaturge a cherche a presenter une approche relatively differente de la morale, un refus de faire le compromis sur le destin du heros determine par Dieu dans les ouvrages litteraires grecs du XVe siecle. Il semble que Sophocles emploie l’oracle non pour venerer Dieu, mais pour montrer la force interieure de l’homme dans la recherche de la verite sur les conditions de vie ou sur les caracteres humains bases sur la verite. Mots-Cles: destin, recherche de la verite, entetement, oracle

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207