Alberta Schweitzera etyka czci dla życia jako mistyka panteistyczna i mistyka jednoczenia się z bytem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Albert Schweitzers’s Reverence for Life ethics as the panteistic mysticism and the mysticism of uniting with beingThis article presents the philosophical-ethical programme of Albert Schweitzer — i.e. his postulate of the Reverence for Life — from the perspective of it being a determinant of the mystical and pantheistic therefore also monistic system, which is built here on the basis of the idea — and at the same time the ideal of this moral philosophy — of the mystical uniting with being, i.e. the unio mystica with life in all its manifestations that is with seemingly particular wills-to-live as “parts” of monistic Will-to-Live.In addition, the text shows that mysticism inherent in Schweitzer’s system, Christian in its foundation, finds its reference in talking about non-confessional non-religious mysticism too.The third aim of this paper is to present convergences between Schweitzer’s mystical feeling of the reverence for life and the so-called sensus numinis — as a derivative of the term numinosum — of Rudolf Otto’s phenomenology, in terms of the category of Creature-Feeling and related to it the concept of interdependence of the pantheistic-monistic being entity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".