Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the problems of the totality of Euro-American rationalist thinking that often dis-locates embodied thought and being through a consensus of scientific management and amusement. The culture of consensus perpetuates non- thinking being through the eradication of individuality in a totality. The realization of this tranquilized familiarity is a product of deep reality: the reflection of cultural practices, norms, and epistemologies that existentially affect one’s life revealed through the investigation of those very practices, norms, and epistemologies that underlie most cultural assumptions. Access to deep reality reveals the phenomenology of apathy. Examining the consensus of being that rationalist thought dictates and learning from other forms of knowledge such as Daoist philosophy alongside Euro-American thought offers a way of being on the periphery of rationalist thought that resists subsumption. Deep reality takes into consideration that other modes of thinking and being harmonize the mind/body dis-location: it is a way of thinking that attempts to expand beyond the Eurocentric philosophical tradition. Revealing from the periphery that commonality is more present than absent, dis-location forms the realization that the mastery of rationalist thought is alienated from itself, demonstrating that it is one mode of thinking among many that is in constant transformation. KEYWORDS: deep reality, rationalist thought, philosophical Daoism, dis-location, embodiment, apathy
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".