Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article porte sur l’affinité de pensée entre le maître dominicain Johannes Eckhart (1260-1327) et le philosophe japonais Nishida Kitarō (1870-1945) à propos de la dimension de l’image par rapport au questionnement de ce qui se trouve au-delà de la parole, mais qui demeure comme l’objet central de la recherche théologique et philosophique pour les deux penseurs. L’attitude qui soutient une rencontre entre les pensées de Eckhart et Nishida peut réduire les prétentions absolutistes et identitaires qui empêchent un renouvellement de la philosophie et de la théologie. La vérité qui apparaît dans la rencontre de deux penseurs est une vérité qui reste une, mais pluraliste, puisqu’elle sait respecter la différence des identifications religieuses et philosophiques — il ne s’agit pas de les nier en mêlant tout dans un même système indifférencié — et à la fois elle sait garder un fond qui résiste au-delà ou en deçà des différences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".