MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400495718 · doi:10.1515/kierke-2024-0006

Re-Staging Existence: Revisiting Kierkegaard’s Theory of Life Stages

2024· article· en· W4400495718 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Regier

Bibliographic record

VenueKierkegaard Studies Yearbook · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicKierkegaardian Philosophy and Influence
Canadian institutionsAssumption University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyStage (stratigraphy)EpistemologyPsychoanalysisPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we re-evaluate Kierkegaard’s theory of life stages (or spheres) and suggest an alternative interpretation. This alternative approach to the stages will serve as a corrective to problems arising from interpretations promoting an ethical-religious stage, or which elide distinctions between stages entirely. To support this interpretation, we will examine the role polarity plays within the stages, the necessity of respecting the boundaries Kierkegaard draws between stages, and advocate for a greater recognition and appreciation of religiousness A within the broader theory. Our hope is to reveal new avenues for understanding Kierkegaard’s ethics, while also contextualizing the pseudonyms in a way that brings greater clarity and consistency between their respective contributions and his broader oeuvre.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKierkegaard Studies YearbookSame topicKierkegaardian Philosophy and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207