MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567352341

Alain Badiou and the Book of Acts

2016· article· en· W2567352341 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Worthington, Hollis Phelps

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Bible and Critical Theory · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApostlePhilosophyProclamationInterpretation (philosophy)Event (particle physics)Subject (documents)EpistemologyTheologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Bible and Critical TheorySame topicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207