MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411665868 · doi:10.2478/sh-2025-0006

Logos Reconstructed: On the Ideal of Adam’s Originally Perfect Language and Recovering its Semiotic Realism

2025· article· en· W4411665868 on OpenAlexaff
Rayan Magon

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia Humana · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhilosophy and Theoretical Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemioticsLogos Bible SoftwareRealismIdeal (ethics)LinguisticsPhilosophyEpistemologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Umberto Eco in The Search for the Perfect Language explores the ‘dream of a perfect language’ that has sought to recapitulate the lost perfection of Adam’s original language. Humanity is seen as forgetful of the preternatural knowledge once contained in a transparent language that perfectly identified essences. Eco’s historical narrative of this pursuit, labeled “a series of failures,” is examined first. Then, Leibniz’s Adamicism is explored, which asserts that a language can be Adamic if it mirrors the natural and non-arbitrary qualities of Adam’s language. Cross-culturally, Sanskrit realism and Plato’s natural-name thesis support this, emphasizing the connection between words and meanings. Following this, the criteria for linguistic perfection (◊P) are established, relying on five necessary assumptions (A) concerning ontology, epistemology, accessibility, translatability, and intersubjectivity. This paper defends reconstructing an ideal language without seeking to return to the forever lost mother tongue. Instead, it assesses the potential for our current system-of-signs to regain semiotic realism and represent reality accurately. A thought experiment justifies returning to semiotic realism, examining the potential of revealing the hidden phenomenology of logos – the universal reason underlying all languages. Conclusively, this project rejects empirical nominalism and explores accessing the preternatural knowledge of necessary and immutable ideas, lost after the fall and Babel’s catastrophe.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudia HumanaSame topicPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceFrench-language works237,207