Bibliographic record
Abstract
After his conversion in 1816, the young Newman was under the influence of evangelical teaching. He considered the Bible literally as the infallible Word of God, the only source of authority for the Christian in matters of doctrine and conduct. When he became a fellow of Oriel College, Oxford, he was taught by Hawkins, the Provost, that Christian doctrine is to be found in the traditions, creeds and formularies of the Church, the role of Scripture being confined to proving doctrine. It is clear that he did not adopt that view immediately. A close study of his unpublished sermons shows that the authority of the Bible kept its full sway over him for a long time to come. It was only on the eve of the Oxford Movement, in 1832, that he integrated Hawkins’ teaching. From then on, Newman’s spiritual itinerary was to be a quest for a final authority that would complement the Bible. On the other hand, confronted with the challenge posed by Science to Holy Scripture, he took a stand in a sermon of 1826 that he was to keep to the end of his life. He felt that there is no need to try and reconcile the Bible and Science. First because revealed religion has its own evidence, that is at least as strong as that of Science, second because scientific knowledge is so subject to change that it would be wasting one’s time and degrading to go about trying to accommodate religion to the theories of Science.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.009 |
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".