Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter begins with a presentation of writers during Schopenhauer’s time who also wrote about Hindu thought, such as Herder, Schelling, the Schlegel brothers, and Hegel, contrasting them with Schopenhauer’s relatively more knowledgeable approach. It then considers the question of whether Schopenhauer’s interest in Hindu thought diminished as he grew older or if his fundamental doctrines changed due to his subsequent studies of Buddhism; the author argues that it did not, contrary to some recent commentators. The chapter concludes by examining the extent to which Schopenhauer understood Hindu thought as an outlook that fully supports his pessimism and shows that Schopenhauer remained uninformed about how the Vedantic tradition includes the practice of <italic>bhakti</italic> (devotion, love). This is not exactly the path of Schopenhauerian asceticism but is an alternative to asceticism that involves a spontaneous embracing of the other-worldly in this world and an invitation to higher love in this life.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".