MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Love in the smooth flow of becoming

2022· article· en· W4226208475 on OpenAlexaff
Avron Kulak

Bibliographic record

VenueInscriptions · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersPrinceton University
KeywordsNothingEvent (particle physics)PhilosophyConscienceDoctrineChristianityEpistemologyTheologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beginning with Badiou’s insistence that Christianity deploys all of the parameters of the event, I examine how Nietzsche, Derrida, and Kierkegaard help us understand the relationship between the event and biblical principles. Nietzsche aligns the event with the command of conscience to recreate our values from nothing prior, also insisting that such a conscience is created by Christianity. For Derrida only the event as the irruption of the absolutely new makes possible the just decision that must come into existence as if nothing of the law previously existed. While Nietzsche and Derrida implicitly invoke (presuppose) the doctrine of creation from nothing, Kierkegaard shows creation to be the ontological expression of the biblical command to love that, itself created from nothing prior – from neither immediate self- nor immediate preferential love – provides the critical point of view from which to appropriate and espouse the smooth flow of becoming.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInscriptionsSame topicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207