The ‘mystical’ and the ‘modern’: Mutual entanglement and multiple interactions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
‘Mysticism’ and ‘modernity’, two constructs that emerged in the West during the post-medieval era, were created partly in opposition to each other. What were regarded as ‘mystical traditions’ were seen, by several influential thinkers of ‘modern’ discourses, as a phenomenon of the medieval era and the antithesis of rationality, and those traditions were employed by ‘counterculture’ currents in their critique of the modern world. This article problematizes and nuances the relationship between the mystical and the modern and highlights various aspects of their reciprocity, entanglement and harmony. It argues that the reconstruction of mystical traditions as ‘mystic-ism’, which started in the 17th century, resulted in the rejuvenation of those facets of such traditions that were harmonious with modern discourses along with the adoption of modern elements into the concept of mysticism. Therefore, the mystical and the modern enjoy a hybrid relation of ‘integrejection’ rather than a simple connection of exclusion.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it