A teoria de Deus e o desafio do niilismo: Hans Jonas a propósito de Nietzsche
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pretende-se, nesse artigo, analisar a interpretação de Hans Jonas do aforismo 125 de A Gaia Ciência, de Nietzsche, tal como ela se apresenta na reflexão desenvolvida nas aulas ministradas por Jonas no Carleton College, de Ottawa, no semestre de inverno de 1952-1953 e guardadas nas anotações (inéditas) intituladas The theory of God, conservadas no Philosophisches Archiv de Hans Jonas, na Universität Konstanz. Para tanto, partimos da análise jonasiana do medo do desconhecido como elemento central nas filosofias de Epicuro e, especialmente, Pascal, para mostrar como Nietzsche aprofunda a reflexão iniciada pelo filósofo de Port-Royal, a fim de demostrar como a intensificação do medo e do sentimento de solidão se apresentariam como possibilidade de enfrentamento do niilismo. Do ponto de vista dos interesses próprios de Jonas, não só estaríamos diante de uma teoria sobre Deus, em sentido estrito, mas de uma reflexão sobre a tecnologia como “vontade de ilimitado poder”, ou seja, como exercício do homem que, sozinho e sem Deus, busca o domínio sobre o mundo.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".