Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For Emmanuel Lévinas, concrete circumstances of human suffering problematize abstract conceptions of God. Lévinas considers the face of the suffering Other to be the locus of ethical action and ethics as the realm of transcendence. This article relates Lévinas’s conception of the Other’s suffering face to pragmatic observations about humans’ capacity to respond to suffering, and explores whether artwork depicting faces, photography specifically, may uniquely provoke empathetic, ethical responses in an observer. I argue, using examples from twentieth-century Japanese photographer Shōmei Tōmatsu’s images of Nagasaki nuclear bomb survivors, that images have the capacity to reveal hidden dimensions of human experience and provoke humility through estrangement. Tōmatsu’s photographs may renew a viewer’s vulnerability to the pain of others and re-orient a viewer’s self towards relational selfhood. Ultimately, if God is present in the fabric of face-to-face encounters, as Lévinas suggests, artwork that fosters empathetic human relations bears transcendent significance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".