MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108044944 · doi:10.1515/naha-2019-0013

I, You, We: Community and Redemption in Rosenzweig

2020· article· en· W3108044944 on OpenAlexaff
Michael L. Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueNaharaim · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeal (ethics)PolityJudaismThouSociologyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyTheologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the early decades of the twentieth century, the concept of community ( Gemeinschaft ) was associated with an ideal society or polity; a host of figures conceived of redemption as the creation and development of community. In this paper, I briefly discuss how this ideal was appropriated by Martin Buber and how genuine community came to mean, for him, a society organized in terms of a collection of I-Thou oriented relationships. I then consider how the same ideal might help us to understand the social and historical ideal which Franz Rosenzweig takes to be the redemptive ideal of Judaism and the Jewish people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNaharaimSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207