Comparazione della fase iniziale degli itinerari spirituali di Ignazio di Loyola e Teresa d’Avila
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article provides a comparison of the spiritual journeys of Ignatius of Loyola and Teresa of Avila, highlighting above all the common elements. Both start from the essential need for the acceptance by man of his spiritual poverty and the experience of the forgiveness of sins, feeling deeply loved by God in spite of their unfaithfulness. Then they bring up the struggle of the soul against the enemy of human nature who seeks in every way to prevent them from going any further along the spiritual path which they have undertaken. Both experience then preparation for union with God , implemented by the Lord Himself through His divine pedagogy in their regard, until, for Ignatius , he reached the point of the “illumination of Cardoner” and the vision at La Storta, as a mystical experience of loving service, and for Teresa , of engagement and of spiritual marriage , of nuptial and spousal mysticism which, at one and the same time is both the source and the basis of the downward movement, from top to bottom , which is characteristic both of Ignatian and of Teresian spirituality. Both mystical experiences lead the soul to a great forgetfulness of self , as it is now completely devoted to working for the honor of God, by now perceived as the Presence of personal love.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".