MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291388781 · doi:10.3138/tjt.3383

On the Possibility of a Universal Human Community in an Age of the Post-Human: Edith Stein's Philosophical Defence

2015· article· en· W2291388781 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhenomenology and Existential Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanityEmbodied cognitionEpistemologyPoliticsSociologyPhilosophyPsychicHuman conditionSocial thoughtEnvironmental ethicsPsychoanalysisLawTheologyPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If we accept the introduction of a new social category for Edith Stein, namely, the universal human community, certain questions have to be asked. First, how does Stein justify the tenability of such a reality? Second, is her position sound, especially given recent critiques of such a possibility in the works of philosophers like Roberto Esposito and even Michel Foucault? I argue here that Stein justifies the possibility of the concept of humanity on phenomenological and theological grounds. I would also venture that we can also find historical and political motivations for her claim. Finally, though I am largely convinced of the viability of the concept/reality of humanity, I believe we can further justify the possibility of a universal community on the basis of affective grounds that are rooted in the embodied psychic lives of human persons.

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.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.264 · 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