Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article I describe the theoretical bases and the elements of my professional experience which led me to develop an approach which aims at helping the terminally-ill to attain their ultimate development. My central hypothesis is that patients experience, during the terminal phase, the repercussions of the existential drama which become visible while beforehand they had been concealed behind the character armour. This drama consists in the acceptance or the refusal of the fact of having and of being a decomposable mortal body. In the first section, I refer to the work of Gesell in which I derived a conception of human development based on the observation of children. I focus particularly on the pre-puberty period (from 7 to 9 years), a period in which the existential drama surfaces and in which the bulwarks against anxiety are constructed. I also show how parents can, through contact with their children, re-live through them, certain periods of their own development. In the second part, I employ certain notions developed in the theoretical framework by applying them to the situation of the terminally-ill. The latter re-live, mostly in the form of nightmares, the existential drama of the pre-puberty period. The rode of helping agents is to have them share theses nightmares with others, ans thus to prevent terror from becoming omnipresent and to help them to realize their ultimate development. However, just as parents with their children, the helping agents terminally-ill, and in particular their own mourning. They ought then to understand well their own existential predicament.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.008 |
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".