Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper I seek to address a series of themes surrounding Luther's view of agency and action in "Treatise on Good Works."In Section I, I begin with a statement on what I think Luther intended to say.This is followed by an interpretation of the main theme of the "Treatise," viz., faith and works, (Section II).The next step is to trace some of the implications of this main theme including Luther's view of agency and action as stated in the theological context of the treatise (Section III), a specific application of Luther's view to current ethical method and (Section IV), to introduce a current interpretation of Luther's view of passivity, action and agency (Section V).In doing the latter I was quite surprised and very delighted to discover Eberhard Jungel, and have used some aspects of his views as a gloss on Luther's views. I. The Shape of the Treatise on Good Works.Martin Luther was no moral theologian schooled in the nuances of ethical methodology.He was a professor of biblical exegesis.Yet if one approaches the Reformation leaders in terms of their impact on Christian living, then Luther turns out to be by far the more interesting and controversial figure.No where is this more apparent than in the "Treatise on Good Works" where use of the phrase "good works" covers a multitude of moral endeavors, all of which presuppose the centrality of human action and agency. 1 From the very beginning Luther aims to identify a specifically Christian use of the term "good works" which requires that we "watch carefully" for there are many aberrant uses found in certain practices of "trickery and deception" which inevitably mislead us into false and erroneous beliefs. 2 Hence, much of the "Treatise" is given over to exposing the difficulties with such beliefs.For example, one such difficulty is the notion that there is a relation of consequence between good works and acceptance by God, or a reversal in the proper way that faith and works are ordered.Luther offers a more definitive statement of aim 111 https://scholars.
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".