The Biblical Idea of Creation and Its Ethical Interpretation in the Philosophy of Levinas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Figure: see text] Levinas provides an original interpretation of the biblical idea of creation ex nihilo, which goes beyond the traditional understanding in terms of divine power and fabrication. In the first part, this article presents the challenge that the idea of creation poses to traditional logic and ontology by referring to Maimonides’s advocacy of creation in opposition to Aristotle’s assumption of the eternity of the world. Levinas repeats Maimonides’s gesture by enlarging the notion of logos and transposing the idea of creation from the ontological realm to the ethical domain of interpersonal relations. In the second part, it shows how Levinas subjects the idea of creation to a phenomenological reduction, tracing its representational content back to the paradoxical experience of “createdness” within the subject itself. The original meaning of creation is to be sought in relation to the ethical call of the other (person), and within the subject’s passive condition qua responsibility. In this way, the initially religious idea of creation receives a broader philosophical significance as it draws upon a common human experience.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".