Bibliographic record
Abstract
As we approach the Reformation half-millennium we should recognize how much we owe to Luther, but also ponder what a different world is ours. We owe to the Reformation that the hegemony of the medieval world was overcome, leading to modern liberties and individualism; the impetus given to the vernacular; and the overcoming of Aristotelianism. Theologically, Luther has an “exploded” notion of the self as the Christian lives extrinsically, and a non-local notion of the post-Ascension Christ, possibly also of God. He has great insight psychologically. However, tectonic plates have shifted. Epistemologically, it was grasped in the Enlightenment that nature and history form an interrelated causal nexus, disallowing a particularity such as Christians claim took place in history. Ethically, there is a problem for us around both hierarchy and heteronomy, such that it is difficult to know how our values could be reconciled with a religion of revelation. That Luther could scarcely have recognized the equality of women is beside the point; the Christian religion, which he espoused, has fed gender hierarchy. Lutheranism has a peculiar difficulty in that the self must once and again be broken, that the person may live extrinsically in Christ in God; whereas women, in particular, value a once-born sense of self and growth from within. The changes, subtle and complex, can in no way be revoked. We, in our time also, should not lack courage in finding new ways to conceptualize that which is God commensurate with both our epistemology and our ethics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.035 |
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".