Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since Niels Gregersen used the term “deep incarnation” in 2001, it has been taken up by numerous ecotheologians in an effort to re-think the depth of the incarnation. Deep incarnation suggests that the incarnation demonstrates a divine embrace of not only the suffering of human bodies, but also of the pain and suffering of all creatures on Earth. While the framework of deep incarnation provides a foundation for a solid eco-Christology and ecological ethics, I suggest that the doctrine as it now stands continues to harbor hints of human exceptionalism that ecotheologies seek to eschew. I offer a critique of the metaphysical anthropocentrism contained within theologies of deep incarnation, suggesting that the doctrine does not go “deep” enough. Following this, I offer a non-anthropocentric understanding of the incarnation that frees the doctrine of the pitfalls of human exceptionalism. I do this by using a deconstructionist framework that posits that the vulnerability of Jesus allows us to view the incarnation as the divine embrace of all material vulnerability apart from the trappings of any normative epistemological framework based on a human horizon of understanding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".