MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407275655 · doi:10.16995/zygon.15144

Dependency as Ontology: Eastern Orthodox Reflections on Disability, Dependency, and Care

2025· article· en· W4407275655 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZygon® · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the fundamental hurdles for both Christian theology and medical ethics is characterizing disability as an aspect of human experience rather than a deviation from it. Anthropologies that anticipate a fixed subject articulate disability through the lens of pathology, alienating disabled experiences from what it means to be human. Pulling from the social theory of disability, I argue that wellbeing in Eastern Orthodox theology is characterized not by independent performative attainment but through mediated dependency. Eastern Orthodox theological anthropology organizes human dependency around passibility, an innate vulnerability that includes the ability to be acted upon as well as to suffer. Human nature comes packaged with material and social contingency. Christ’s passibility provides a moral framework through which extended states of dependency do not derive from sin or failure but rather serve as an example of quintessential human nature. Ontological dependency reframes persistent need, inviting persons who have been underserved and undervalued into a more inclusive model of human nature.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.340 · 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