Transcendance et transformation de soi dans la doctrine du pur amour selon madame Guyon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La méditation de la pleine conscience, aujourd’hui très populaire, est souvent réduite à une perspective immanentiste postulant que la nature humaine possède en elle-même les ressources de son propre changement. Du point de vue spirituel, cela n’est pas sans dangers pouvant conduire à un vide méditatif artificiel. L’accès à une vie en plénitude ne va pas sans un rapport étroit à l’altérité, au Tout-Autre, réalité transcendante au coeur de la vie de prière. D’où la pertinence d’un dialogue entre théologie et sciences de la santé au sujet des pratiques contemplatives pour un discernement entre oeuvres (efforts personnels) et grâce. Cet article encourage ce dialogue en traitant de transcendence dans l’oeuvre de madame Guyon, mystique française du XVIIe siècle. Il en pose les fondements en décrivant la manière dont cette dernière conçoit la nature de l’expérience de la transcendance, ainsi que la façon dont cette expérience implique une transformation de soi et comment elle s’intègre au quotidien.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".