Bibliographic record
Abstract
transcendental Thomism is a peculiar sort of philosophy: an attempt to adapt traditional Scholastic thinking to Immanuel Kant's (1724-1804) critical method, its fullest expression in Maréchal's five-volume work Le Point de départ de la métaphysique 2 asks the question, "what can serve as a ground for objective knowledge?"While Kant addressed this question by situating the unity of a knowing subject and its object in consciousness, Maréchal's approach finds this unity in Being, making it into a philosophy that grounds religious experience.To experience, for Maréchal, is to think, and to think is to be.It is this need for a ground for religious experience that led Maréchal to make a fundamental methodological claim based on the unifying character of Being: both metaphysical and transcendental philosophy, he says, cover the same subject matter, while moving in different directions.3 The result is a highly individual vocabulary indebted to both traditions, and which can only be read as something altogether new.This paper is a systematic exposition of Maréchal's theory of the Agent Intellect, as found in Cahier V of the Point de départ.It will show that for Reconciling the Active and the PassiveMaréchal's transcendental theory of the Agent Intellect begins by following the fundamentals of Kantian epistemology.Sensation is introduced into the mind according to the forms of space and time, and made into a
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".