MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015381127 · doi:10.1163/18177565-00160a11

Naming God: Exodus 3:14-15 in Augustine’s Enarrationes in Psalmos

2020· article· en· W3015381127 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Glowasky

Bibliographic record

VenueScrinium · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAugustinian Studies and Theology
Canadian institutionsBooth University College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporalityPhilosophyLiteratureExistence of GodKey (lock)Materiality (auditing)TheologyBiblical studiesArtEpistemologyTheismAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Augustine discusses Exodus 3:14-15 on 49 different occasions in his written corpus, 14 of which are found in his Enarrationes in Psalmos. Scholars have been quick to note the importance of God’s self-disclosure as I AM in verse 14 for Augustine’s conception of the divine as esse. However, far less attention has been paid to the place of verse 15 in Augustine’s thought, despite his claim that this verse reveals God’s “other name” (aliud nomen): the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In this article, I discuss four key passages from his Enarrationes in Psalmos – two from the redemptive-historical psalms and two from the psalms of ascent – where Augustine addresses the relationship between the two divine names God reveals to Moses in Exodus 3:14-15. In these four passages, I suggest, Augustine presents temporality and materiality as ongoing necessities for the knowledge of God, despite what he appears to suggest elsewhere.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScriniumSame topicAugustinian Studies and TheologyFrench-language works237,207