Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article montre que George Herbert, tout comme d'autres interprètes de cette période, a probablement utilisé une herméneutique rhétorique dans le but de mettre en contexte et d'harmoniser des textes bibliques en apparence contradictoires. On donne premièrement des exemples de ce processus herméneutique à l'aide des réponses d'Érasme et Thomas Swynnerton au problème d'interprétation des textes bibliques sur le pouvoir de la volonté. On examine ensuite l'approche de Herbert dans son exégèse biblique du Country Parson et de la «Divinitie». On montre finalement que l'interprétation de Herbert des passages du Nouveau Testament sur le pouvoir des clés dans le «The Priesthood» et le «Church-Lock and Key», tout comme ceux de Luther, Calvin et Richard Hooker, suggère une influence des habitudes rhétoriques
 de la pensée.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".