Reason, grace and charity: Augustine and the impact of church doctrine on the construction of intellectual disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines how early church doctrine influenced the construction of and response to intellectual disability. Though the main focus of the paper is on intellectual disability, much of the discussion is more broadly relevant to other types of impairments and human differences. The vehicle for this examination is the work of the key figure in the development and codification of church doctrine, Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354–430 CE). The paper concludes that while church doctrine mitigated the stark association of reason and human value found in classical Greek thought, it did not engender an attitude of equality in this world. The ideas of grace and the ‘divine plan’, while opening up a limited space for acceptance and broad equality in the eyes of God, also reinforced and legitimated an inferior position in this world, leaving those considered to have an intellectual disability on the margins of social life and subject to a charity ultimately undertaken for the salvation of the giver, rather than for the welfare of the recipient. Subsidiary themes related to the construction of intellectual disability, such as ‘object lessons to the wise’ or as ‘monsters’, use as sources of amusement, innocence and their association with children and the charity ethic, are also examined.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".