Bibliographic record
Abstract
Were I to give this paper a subtitle, it would be: “Revisiting the metaphor of the body as house”; and if I were to give it a sub-subtitle, it would be: “The back door, the front door, the bedroom, and the hole in the roof.” In the end I decided not to add these sub-titles, not only for the sake of sheer titular manageability (if I may put it that way), but also because, in doing so, a certain dualism of body and soul or spirit1 might be thereby evoked. Of course, the image of the house as a metaphor for the body⎯a house in which the soul or the spirit dwells, in which perhaps it is even trapped⎯is a familiar one within the Western tradition. Nevertheless, I will be appealing here to the metaphor of the body as a house in the attempt to articulate an idea of God and of the self from within a phenomenology of the body⎯and in doing so, precisely challenging any such dualism. To begin with, by “body” I intend the lived body, bound up in some way with an ipseic phenomenality, itself inseparable from the “sensual” awareness of itself⎯and, of course, the word “sensual,” or “sensuality,” is what precisely is going to be at issue in revisiting the metaphor. Indeed, in the phenomenological literature of recent decades, the word “flesh” is often used to distinguish this ipseic and somehow “sensual” self-awareness from the merely objective body appearing in the world, one object among others, capable of being an object, to some extent, even for the soul or self that “inhabits” it.2 To that extent, if any dualism is to be identified here, it is less that of body and soul or spirit than that of “lived body” and “objective body” or “body object.”
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".