MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942515238 · doi:10.18536/ge.2017.02.2.2.10

Joseph’s Journey: Uncovering Israel’s Unconscious

2017· article· en· W2942515238 on OpenAlexaff
Raj Balkaran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Genius and Eminence · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHEROPower (physics)AdventureUnconscious mindPsychoanalysisAestheticsSociologyPhilosophyLiteratureHistoryArt historyArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper decodes the story of Campbell’s namesake, Joseph of Genesis, son of Jacob. It demonstrates that Joseph, much more so than Moses, represents the archetypal hero. Joseph is called to adventure into the unknown. Due to the boundedness of the Abrahamic worldview, Joseph must leave monotheistic Israel to fulfil his potential in polytheistic Egypt. It is as viceroy of Pharaoh that he comes into his own power, his political eminence an emanation of his intuitive, creative power. Joseph’s journey itself serves as the Call to Adventure for the hero’s journey of Israel: Israel, as a people, must recognize Joseph’s creative power and follow him into Egypt to realize their own procreative power. Before returning to the familiarity of the desert, the motherless children of Israel are called into the unknown to be nourished by the Nile. It is at the banks of the Nile that they fulfil their divine mandate to multiply. Joseph’s intuitive power—the ability to receive and interpret prophetic dreams—makes explicit what is implicitly encoded in the Campbellian hero’s journey: the masculine individual consciousness venturing into the feminine collective unconscious, matrix of creativity, in pursuit of wholeness. His story moreover celebrates the centrality of personal transformation to the Campbellian heroic quest, flourishing through embodiment of transformational leadership.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Genius and EminenceSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207