MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579727406 · doi:10.1177/0309089215611547

Deconstruction in Qohelet: A Response to Mark Sneed

2015· article· en· W2579727406 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Ortlund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Old Testament · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsBriercrest College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeconstruction (building)WitnessPhilosophyArticulation (sociology)Argument (complex analysis)PostmodernismEpistemologyLiteratureArtLawLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ecclesiastes has received a number of postmodern-styled readings in recent decades. One such piece by Mark Sneed distinguishes itself by applying deconstructive methods to show Qohelet's internal contradictions. Although Sneed's argument is helpful and illuminating, certain aspects of Derrida's articulation of ‘deconstruction’ are not well represented. In this article, an alternative ‘deconstruction’ of Qohelet is offered which attempts to witness to tensions within the text instead of applying predetermined concepts from outside.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.039
Scholarly communication0.0090.014
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0170.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of the Old TestamentSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207