MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297988736 · doi:10.31581/jbs-8.1.496(1997)

Metaphor and the Language of Revelation

2022· article· en· W4297988736 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ross Woodman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Bahá’í Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamilies in Therapy and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoulMetaphorRevelationConsciousnessPhilosophyRealmHumanityMeaning (existential)LiteratureHeavenTheologyLiteral and figurative languageArtLinguisticsHistoryEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metaphor is the literal language of the soul. To enter the realm of metaphor as the language of the soul is to come into direct contact with the Word as the originating power of creation, in the Bible identified with God. In thisexploration of metaphorical language as the language of revelation, the richer unveiling of its meaning to be found in the writings of the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh will serve to clarify further the nature of metaphor as that clarification which contains within it an immediate consciousness of the station of Bahá’u’lláh. This newly released consciousness signifies humanity’s coming of age in and as a fully awakened human realization that the earth is now the throne of God, as proclaimed by Bahá’u’lláh in his impassioned address to Carmel as his New Jerusalem Bride. Metaphorically understood, Bahá’u’lláh’s proclamation is “the trumpet” that in the biblical tradition signals the Resurrection. “Trumpet,” “Pen,” “Bride,” “Resurrection”—in metaphors such as these the soul finds its proper home in the redeeming consciousness of a new era described by Bahá’u’lláh as the “Divine Springtime.”

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.054
Scholarly communication0.0100.014
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 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 venueThe Journal of Bahá’í StudiesSame topicFamilies in Therapy and CultureFrench-language works237,207