MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991837721 · doi:10.52641/cadcaj.v2i1.124

Matéria e espírito na cosmologia jonasiana

2017· article· pt· W2991837721 on OpenAlexaff
Lilian Simone Godoy Fonseca

Bibliographic record

VenueCadernos Cajuína · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy and Historical Thought
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpan (engineering)HumanitiesPhilosophyLife spanArtMedicineGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A abrangência temática dos escritos jonasianos é tão surpreendente quanto a profundidade com que os temas são neles abordados. Um bom exemplo dessa afirmação pode ser encontrado num opúsculo intitulado Materie, Geist und Shöpfung, brilhantemente traduzido para o português, Matéria, Espírito e Criação, pelo nosso colega Wendell Lopes. A modesta dimensão da obra quase encobre a densidade filosófica dos artigos ali reunidos. No Prefácio, o próprio Jonas esclarece que a motivação desse ensaio foi um “rascunho sobre o tema Cosmos e o Segundo axioma principal” (p. 9) que um amigo lhe enviou para uma leitura crítica. Ao responder a tese central do artigo, Jonas se deixou levar por uma reflexão mais profunda que resultou nos 18 artículos ali reunidos. Desses, os dois primeiros discutem o conceito inicial do título (a questão da matéria), os três seguintes, a noção do espírito e do 6 ao 16 Jonas se dedica à reflexão sobre Deus1. Dada a complexidade do último tópico, na presente exposição, pretende-se fazer apenas uma breve introdução à cosmologia jonasiana abordando somente os dois primeiros elementos: Matéria e Espírito, deixando a mais extensa discussão sobre a questão teológica, para uma oportunidade futura.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCadernos CajuínaSame topicPhilosophy and Historical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207