MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026118093 · doi:10.1163/156973111x594675

‘Structural Indifference’ and Compatibilism in Reformed Orthodoxy

2011· article· en· W2026118093 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Helm

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reformed Theology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsRegent College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompatibilismEpistemologyPhilosophyPresumptionContingencyOrthodoxyFree willPolitical scienceLawTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Reformed Thought on Freedom the Scotian apparatus of synchronic contingency, structural indifference, and logical moments is deployed in an attempt to show that the Reformed Orthodox espoused Scotian freedom of indifference as an intrinsic feature of their anthropology. It is counter-argued that the sense given to ‘structural indifference’ is at odds with the Orthodox commitment to indifference in the divided sense. Further, recent commentators misunderstand the divided sense only as the Reformed Orthodox use it. Finally it is briefly argued that the Orthodox use of the contrast between being free and being constrained, and their criteria for moral accountability, are consistent with certain forms of compatibilism. So it is a reasonable presumption that as regards human freedom, the Orthodox favoured a version of compatibilism.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.049
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reformed TheologySame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207