Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume. — Nous examinons, a l’occasion de cette note, une comparaison que Plotin opere entre la demarche du philosophe en quete de l’Un et celle du devot qui penetre un sanctuaire secret (ἄδυτον) a la rencontre du dieu. Outre sa capacite suggestive, cette image n’est pas sans en rappeler une autre, d’origine platonicienne cette fois, et du reste bien connue, la caverne du livre VII de la Republique . Or, bien que les ressemblances soient frappantes, les dissemblances le sont tout autant, et meme davantage, au point que nous nous risquons a parler d’une « caverne inversee ». L’ἄδυτον dont parle Plotin n’a plus rien, en effet, du domaine des ombres et des simulacres ; au contraire, il abrite, dans le secret et l’obscurite, le principe de la verite la plus elevee. La prison souterraine cede a la demeure sacree du dieu-Un. La finalite demeure certes semblable, mais l’itineraire est transforme, conduisant desormais le philosophe a l’entree plutot qu’a la sortie. A bstract. — In this note, we examine Plotinus’ comparison between the approach of a philosopher in search of the One and that of a religious person who enters a secret sanctuary (ἄδυτον) to meet the god. Besides its suggestive power, this image also brings to mind another very well-known image, namely the allegory of the cave developed by Plato in Book VII of the Republic . However, although the similarities are striking, the dissimilarities are just as noteworthy , or even more so , to the point that we venture to speak of a ‘reverse cave’. The ἄδυτον described by Plotinus has, in fact, nothing to do with the domain of shadows and simulacra; on the contrary, it contains , hidden in secrecy and darkness, the principle of the highest truth. The underground prison here becomes the sacred abode of the god-One. Overall, the objective remains similar, but the path is modified, now leading the philosopher to the entrance rather than the exit. Lea DEROME Universite de Montreal Pavillon 2910, boul. Edouard-Montpetit Montreal (QC) Canada H3C 3J7 lea.derome@umontreal.ca
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".