Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude porte sur l’interprétation non supranaturaliste de l’histoire du salut chez Paul Tillich. Dès 1923, la question se trouve au coeur de son débat avec Karl Barth. Ses deux articles sur le réalisme croyant (1927 et 1928) proposent la conception d’une foi qui perçoit le divin non pas en se détournant du réel, mais au coeur de la réalité présente. L’article de 1927 sur « Eschatologie et histoire » élabore une philosophie de l’histoire qui fait voir les signes de la transcendance au coeur de l’histoire en tant que réalité de sens menacée par le non-sens. Enfin, l’article de 1930 sur « Christologie et interprétation de l’histoire » présente le Christ comme centre de l’histoire, garantissant le sens de l’histoire non pas en survenant subrepticement dans l’histoire, mais en tant qu’irruption dans l’histoire du fondement inconditionné de l’histoire.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".