Review of Dale M. Schlitt, German Idealism’s Trinitarian Legacy . Albany, NY: SUNY, 2016. 456 pages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this follow up to several detailed studies of Hegel’s philosophy of religion, Dale Schlitt takes a decidedly Schellingian turn. German Idealism’s Trinitarian Legacies is as much about the Trinitarian thought of the late Schelling as it is about Hegel. In this regard alone, the book stands apart. Where Hegel’s philosophy of religion has been well mapped and explored, the late Schelling’s alternative remains the most underresearched chapter in the English reception of modern German philosophy. Schlitt shows how Schelling and Hegel are never closer than in their appreciation for the logical, historical, and universal significance of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Precisely because they come so near on this point, the fundamental dispute that divides the two comes into sharp focus in their disagreement about the nature of Trinity. Behind the dispute lies their related conflict concerning the structure of personality, with ramifications that extend to psychology and politics. Schlitt’s book is an important contribution to the history of philosophy and theology, and will remain a standard work in the field for years. In the following review essay, I offer some unsystematic reflections as to why I think this book is indispensable both for scholars of German Idealism and twentieth-century theology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.012 |
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".