Eros, Agape, and Neighbour-Love as Ontological Gift
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: In Eros and Self-Emptying, Lee Barrett suggests a reading of Augustine and Kierkegaard that interprets the believer's love for God as eros for God's agape-nature. While Barrett's analysis suggests how one might mediate between the teleological necessity of eros and the gratuitous movement of agape in the love between God and the believer, it does not answer the question of how this same mediation can be accomplished in the case of neighbour-love. As a result, it leaves unaddressed certain lingering worries in Augustine and Kierkegaard studies about how the neighbour can be the proper object of love rather than an indirect recipient of the believer's love for God. This article suggests that the problem of neighbour-love can be addressed by extending Barrett's account of God's love as ontological gift in light of Augustine's assertion in De Trinitate that God “loves us in order that we might become.” The resultant picture grounds love for the neighbour in her particular individuality as she is being called into fellowship with God, rather than in the application of a universal ethical law or as a by-product of the believer's obligation to Christ.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it