MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362586182 · doi:10.1080/15528030.2023.2196252

The Jewish soulful aging of Jacques Élie Derrida

2023· article· en· W4362586182 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion Spirituality & Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJudaismDeconstruction (building)Destiny (ISS module)SpiritualityRevelationSubject (documents)Argument (complex analysis)FaithGnosticismPhilosophyLiteratureTransformative learningReligious studiesSociologyPsychoanalysisTheologyArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The essay explores the Jewish life and career of Jacques Derrida (1930–2004), suggesting how, with age, his understanding of his destiny as leader of a transformative intellectual movement grew into a soulful journey. Derrida’s celebrated volume of work, based on his masterful concept of deconstruction, is seen as integral to his personal struggle with his Jewishness. While Derrida has been the subject of numerous biographies, including many that debate the influence of his Jewish background, this essay considers more directly how his quest to discover alternative spaces of language and thought (and refuge) became increasingly linked to his interpretations of the radicality of Judaic traditions. The argument moves from a discussion of his childhood as an Algerian Sephardic Jew to his career and life in Paris, to the relationship between deconstruction and spirituality, and finally, to his reckoning in his later years with survivorship, legacy, faith, and wisdom as guides to his internal desert of wandering and revelation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion Spirituality & AgingSame topicPhilosophy, Ethics, and ExistentialismFrench-language works237,207