Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a variety approaches to the definition of anthropology described and it is shown that the contents of the term anthropology is distinguished by the unique multi-valence. It is analyzed how the development of mathematics, physics , astronomy, cosmology and other natural sciences raised the questions and problems of pure anthropologic contents even before the natural scientists and mathematicians. Then the conclusion is made that the philosophic history places every man to the necessity of a serious choice between such two opposed opinions: (1) Man is a measure of all things and also a top of evolution. But if the personality of man vanishes after the death, then the role of man is similar to the role of a soap bubble. Moreover, if the Universe is dying, then the role of all mankind is similar to the role of the short-lived soap foam. It is possible to show that this opinion is internally contradictory. (2) Man is a top of the God Creation, to which after the penitence before God and acceptance of the Christ expiating sacrifice it is given the eternal life and the government of the Creation under the leadership of God – and then his existence has the real sense in the eternity! And also the modern science does not contradict to this. In conclusion it is established that namely the biblical theology solved the question how man can obtain the Truth in the sense of the adequate reflection of the reality.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| 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".