MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386764331 · doi:10.26443/arc.v35i.548

Given Life

2007· article· en· W4386764331 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Rebidoux

Bibliographic record

VenueArc The Journal of the School of Religious Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhenomenology and Existential Philosophy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ver the past decade, interest among an English audience in the work of French phenomenologist Michel Henry has grown considerably.While there is still relatively little secondary work done on him in English, and while a number of his works-including his significant late work Incarnation.Une philosophic de la chair1-are still untranslated, that promises to change soon.At present, interest in Henry comes primarily from students of phenomenology, as well as from those interested in the so-called 'return of religion' in Continental thought since the last quarter of the 20th century.For those interested in the relation of the phenomenological method to this return of religion, one of the main issues is how phenomenology itself is being redefined and expanded to address new modes of phenomenality, including what has been called by Henry and others 'invisible phenomenality'.This paper will examine the unfolding of this redefined phenomenology in Henry's work; it will consider especially what methodological difficulties arise for Henry in his unfolding of what is defined by him as 'affective phenomenality' as the key to fundamental ontology.In doing so, it will also address what has been referred to as the "theological turn" of Henry's thinking in his attempt to solve those difficulties.1.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1340.059

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArc The Journal of the School of Religious StudiesSame topicPhenomenology and Existential PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207