MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014662875 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.15.1.003

The Politics of a Mel-placed Passion and Displaced Bodies

2007· article· en· W2014662875 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John C. McDowell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassionPoliticsBody of ChristTRACE (psycholinguistics)InterdependenceTextualityAbstractionAestheticsPhilosophyFocus (optics)Space (punctuation)SociologyArtLiteratureEpistemologyTheologyLawPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gibson’s Christ has a body, and a body of hope at that. However, this Christ is little more than a bare body, a body made naked without its without a full covering of life (or rather it is a body reduced to barest life), and therefore a body that lacks the multiple extensions in space and time that characterise bodies and their being available to and for other bodies. This paper seeks to trace Gibson’s series of losses and their political implications, three of which are not only particularly important but are interdependent. Drawing metaphorically on the terms of the C4th Trinitarian theologies, this is argued to constitute something of a deadly tri-unity of threefold bodylessness, a perichoretic (interdependent co-inherence) perversity which triply enforces the terror against bodily (con)textuality. This sense of bodily loss flows directly from the nature of the abstraction involved in the film’s selected focus, and manifests itself triunely in the “Jewish-problem”; the life of the Christ; and the nature of the saving achieved by the sufferings of the condemned Jesus.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.049
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and Popular CultureSame topicPhilosophy, Ethics, and ExistentialismFrench-language works237,207