MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945266784 · doi:10.1558/rsth.38705

Thinking About Transformative Aspects of Gnostic Writing Pedagogy

2019· article· en· W2945266784 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Kaler

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGnosticismTransformative learningPerspective (graphical)Power (physics)SociologyEpistemologyPedagogyPhilosophyLiteratureArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses some of the ways in which our understanding of gnosticism could be expanded if we looked at gnostic texts as means to create new selves for their readers, rather than imparting doctrinal knowledge or giving evidence regarding the power struggles and self-definitions at play in early Christian communities. Drawing on both the work of Pierre Hadot and modern understandings of writing pedagogy, the article argues that it would be useful to be able to read these texts as means by which the reader could create a gnostic sense of self, with specific content seen as a means to that end. This need not be the only perspective taken on gnosticism; rather, it is presented as a useful tool to add to our interpretive toolkit

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical StudiesFrench-language works237,207