MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1906772320 · doi:10.1177/0008429815599803

Jesus’ Resurrection as a Saturated Phenomenon?

2015· article· en· W1906772320 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Don Schweitzer

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicViolence, Religion, and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonAssertionNew TestamentPhilosophyMeaning (existential)ConstitutionObjectificationEpistemologyPower (physics)TheologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines Jean-Luc Marion’s notion of a saturated phenomenon and assesses some of its strengths and weaknesses as a way of understanding Jesus’ resurrection. It argues that Marion’s notion is very helpful for understanding the uniqueness and decisiveness of Jesus’ resurrection, its resistance to objectification, its transformative power and its excess of meaning. However, Marion’s assertion that a person is completely passive in receiving a saturated phenomenon does not fit with the way Jesus’ resurrection is described in the New Testament. This paper offers a correction to Marion’s notion on this point, arguing that people do have the freedom to play an active role in their reception of Jesus’ resurrection and in their constitution by it, a freedom founded by Jesus’ resurrection itself.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.048
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicViolence, Religion, and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207