Bibliographic record
Abstract
En 1923, Rudolf Otto a rassemblé un certain nombre d’annexes à Das Heilige (1917) et, dans l’une de celles-ci, il rapprocha le bouddhisme zen et le mystique médiéval Maître Eckhart. Le point commun était que, tout comme la vie vit sans pourquoi, vit parce qu’elle vit, l’homme juste travaille pour travailler, et ainsi seulement il est véritablement libre. Quand, en 1965, Shizuteru Ueda publia sa thèse de doctorat sur Eckhart, il inclut une comparaison avec le zen reprenant ce thème. À la lumière de la dichotomie action-contemplation dans la tradition occidentale, nous examinons les similitudes et les différences que souligne Ueda entre Eckhart et le zen à cet égard et leur signification pour la pensée contemporaine. Dans les deux cas, la projection au-delà de Dieu se traduit par une nouvelle manière d’être et d’agir dans le monde : celui qui a expérimenté cette vacuité ne demande plus pourquoi, ne cherche plus et, pour cette raison, a trouvé.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".