Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the publication of Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism (Badiou 2003), much scholarly attention has been paid to the relationship between French philosopher Alain Badiou and the Apostle Paul. This fresh work has, for some, reanimated the discourse of Pauline biblical studies, and thus attracted many to explore a deeper connection between contemporary philosophy and Pauline biblical interpretation. However, few biblical scholars, theologians, and philosophers have attempted to extend Badiou’s framework into other domains, such as the Book of Acts, or other books of the Bible. While Alain Badiou might disavow the general usefulness of the Book of Acts, we suggest the Book of Acts contains all the formal elements necessary for the establishment of a truth procedure: 1) truth as evental 2) truth as generic multiple 3) truth as universal and 4) truth as militant proclamation. In this sense, perhaps the Book of Acts is a superior heuristic tool for articulating Badiou’s notion of truth as it proceeds from an event, as it not only offers a window into the subject constituted by the event, but also the material effects of truth in established places of discourse. It is the book of Acts that creatively organizes the event of the resurrection not in terms of philosophical speculation, but in terms of actual historical circumstances and sequences, which serve to elucidate Badiou's model in even more profound ways.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".