MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110905043 · doi:10.47421/rthph152_3_237-258

Philosophie et théologie dans le cartésianisme : la théorie cartésienne de la création des vérités éternelles et sa postérité

2020· article· en· W3110905043 on OpenAlexaff
Aurélien Chukurian

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de Théologie et de Philosophie · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyChristologyConversationEpistemologyReading (process)TheologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines Descartes’ theory of the free creation of eternal truths, showing the theological implications of its underlying philosophical principles. The author ponders the way in which Descartes treats certain topics that pertain to natural theology (God’s dignity and power, the equivocity between the finite and the infinite), as well as the Christological tension that runs through his theory. The theological echoes of this theory are then assessed, looking at thinkers after Descartes as well as the minores, with a focus on two theological themes: the recovery of univocity, and some of the contours of the kind of Christology Descartes’ theory authorizes. The aim of the article, by showing the fruitfulness of an approach that places modern philosophy and theology in conversation, is to ask how a theological reading of Descartes and Cartesian thought may help renew its study.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.037
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de Théologie et de PhilosophieSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207