MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109567198 · doi:10.29173/pandpr19829

In Memoriam: The Experience of Eulogizing a Loved One

2010· article· en· W2109567198 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paul Sopčák

Bibliographic record

VenuePhenomenology & Practice · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEulogyNothingPathosSilenceActive listeningMeaning (existential)Natural (archaeology)PsychoanalysisAestheticsPsychologyHistoryLiteraturePhilosophyCommunicationArtEpistemologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether the "call" to write a eulogy comes when we learn of our loved one's death or shortly after, it comes when we may not yet be able to mourn--let alone make a declaration. The death of a loved one may alienate us from the world and from the sense of self that rests on our daily living in the world and with others. It may "individualize us down to ourselves" by throwing us into a world utterly devoid of meaning and anchors. Paradoxically, from this "nothing," a call may usher forth demanding us to take a stand on our loved one's death and ultimately on our being here. Trying to avoid hearing this call when threatened by the nothingness and world-collapse that a loved one's death brings may be the most natural response. But what happens when we are asked to write a eulogy? Can we ignore the call or is it itself inextricably intertwined with our mourning and precisely that which begs to be expressed? This paper describes the experience of eulogizing a loved one as an encounter with the mortality of words, as listening to silence, and as addressing the deceased--without bathos or pathos.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.337 · 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.

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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhenomenology & PracticeSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207