MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054866861 · doi:10.1093/litthe/frs035

Syncretism and Idiosyncrasy: The Notion of Act in Thomas Traherne's Contemplative Practice

2012· article· en· W2054866861 on OpenAlexaff
B. J. Barber

Bibliographic record

VenueLiterature and Theology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContemplationMysticismPhilosophyHeavenLiteratureTheologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The writings of the seventeenth-century priest and mystic, Thomas Traherne, provide readers with instructions on how best to mirror God's act-like nature. Traherne's formulation of God-as-act is expressed in both the Commentaries of Heaven and Centuries of Meditation, where his understanding of God draws upon both Neo-Platonic and Aristotelian understandings of ‘act,’ while reiterating Christian and biblical conceptions of an ever-creating deity. By drawing the Christian, scholastic, and Neo-Platonic traditions together, Traherne demonstrates his propensity for sycncretic eclecticism. His elaboration of how to attain to his unique notion of God-likeness is drawn from personal experience. Traherne relates his contemplative progress in the Centuries, where he describes for the reader's benefit the seven steps that led him to the beatific vision. The stepwise structure of Traherne's direction resembles the instructions of St. Ignatius and the Neo-Platonic Christian mystics to their exericants and novices. However, Traherne's method differs from St. Ignatius's Spiritual Exercises in its celebration of all creation over any particular object or person. Unlike the Neo-Platonists, Traherne's practice does not seek the ecstatic, but insists on the contemplative's lucidity throughout their spiritual progress.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiterature and TheologySame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207