MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406362380 · doi:10.7202/1115387ar

Walter J. Ong, Charles Taylor, and the Age of Romanticism

2024· article· en· W4406362380 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas J. Farrell

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Explorations · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligious Studies and Spiritual Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisenchantmentRomanticismPoetryThe RenaissanceClassicsHistoryArt historyPhilosophyLiteratureArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In my 20,762-word essay, I present an ambitious account of the life and work of the American Jesuit Renaissance specialist and cultural historian and pioneering media ecology theorist Walter J. Ong (1912-2003; Ph.D. in English, Harvard University, 1955). In addition, I succinctly highlight two books by the Canadian Catholic philosopher Charles Taylor (born in 1931; doctorate in philosophy, Oxford University, 1961): (1) The Language Animal: The Full Shape of the Human Linguistic Capacity (2016); and (2) Cosmic Connections: Poetry in the Age of Disenchantment (2024) – both published by Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. In my discussion of Taylor’s new 2024 book Cosmic Connections, I especially highlight his chapters on Gerard Manley Hopkins and T. S. Eliot. In the text of my lengthy essay (pp. 1-44), I frequently list related works of interest. I hope that you feel the force of my associations. In any event, my alphabetized list of “References” at the end of my essay is rather lengthy (pp. 45-56).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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 studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueNew ExplorationsSame topicReligious Studies and Spiritual PracticesFrench-language works237,207