Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theorization of learning process is a function of the philosophical analysis that one offers of the relationship between man and the world and every philosophical approach has provided a particular theoretical framework of the relationship between man and the world.Transcendent Theosophy as an evolved revision of Islamic wisdom contains a special explanation of the relationship between man and the world and it is evident that the description of the learning process will be different from this point of view.Thus, the current essay seeks to provide an answer based on the Transcendent Theosophy to the question: how is the learning process?It struggles to provide a theoretical framework for the experimental observations in learning psychologyusing the deductive method and answering this question based on Sadra's philosophy.The result of this research was that Transcendent Theosophy has a special view of the relationship between man and the world and enumerates certain principles for this relationship: harmony of world and man, interactive state of this relationship, unity based state of this relationship, personality dynamicity in the relationship process, and intuitive nature of this unity.In the light of this approach learning process is redefined as follows: harmonic interaction of man and world that becomes united with the transcendent realities and reaches intuitive truth through personality dynamicityand its result can be seen in the phenomenological (representational), ideological and behavioral aspects of human existence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.942 | 0.909 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".