Phenomenon of an Irrational in Eastern Direction in Thinking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indian mythology and the Vedic image of the world built on its basis are of exceptional importance for understanding the entire Eastern culture. The mythological complex of Indian representations is the most ancient (researchers attribute its formation to the III millennium BC) and surprisingly persistent. The Vedic image of the world combines the features of proper mythology and religion and philosophy; it becomes the initial model for the formation of later religious and philosophical doctrines. Recall that it was the Vedic image of the world that formed the Brahmanism ideology prevailing in Ancient India and then formed the foundation of modern Hinduism through a modification of the Brahmin doctrine. Moreover, even religious-philosophical systems opposed to Brahmanism, such as Jainism, Bhagavatism, Buddhism, which questioned Rigveda and other Samhitas's sanctity, maintained a standard worldview continuity and solidarity with the fundamental images of the Vedic world model. Of course, Indian mythology, especially at the early stages of its formation, has much in common with mythological representations of other peoples of the world. At a particular stage in the development of mythic consciousness, we can everywhere find syncretic and anthropomorphic motifs, echoes of totemism or animism, the influence of matriarchy, and, of course, the tendency to overcome polytheistic traditions and the tendency to theistic monism. However, in the East, all these elements of mythological consciousness acquired an exceptional fundamental sound, making it possible to raise the question of the specifically Eastern way of world relations and the key importance of Vedic images in the general model of the world built by the East.
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 | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".