Together Whole: A Participatory Understanding of Health from a Wesleyan Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article argues for a participatory understanding of health from a Wesleyan perspective. Such an understanding needs to be rooted in Wesley's soteriology of the renewal of creation. Health from that perspective also has communal, social, and ecological dimensions. Such participatory understanding of health then is exemplified by looking at the social and communal significance of Jesus' healing ministry, which never focuses solely on the health of individuals. It follows John Swinton in his examination of depression and dementia as phenomena that need to be looked at theologically anew from a participatory perspective, since they are always more than just conditions attached to individuals. The second half of the article highlights Wesley's soteriology shaped by an understanding of salvation/health as participation in the divine, deals critically with a too narrow understanding of the relation between health and holiness, and finally affirms the Eucharist as a paradigmatic and non-individualistic expression of health as participation with not only communal but also ecological implications.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".