Proximité et distance infinie chez Levinas : le serment du secret comme lutte éthique contre la tentation du sacré
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emmanuel Levinas, dans Totalité et Infini (1961), décrit la relation de transcendance ou la religion comme en étant une où se mêlent à la fois proximité et distance infinie. Il s’agit d’une relation qui s’oppose au sacré compris comme relation fusionnelle, extatique et non éthique entre le Moi et un faux transcendant : l’« il y a ». Cet article cherchera à faire sens de cette association contradictoire entre proximité et distance infinie par le biais d’une clé de lecture phénoménologique décrivant la relation de transcendance comme initiation du Moi au secret d’Autrui. Cette proximité sera alors décrite comme serment : promesse que le Moi fait de ne pas blesser la confiance qu’Autrui lui accorde personnellement (élection) lorsqu’il lui révèle son secret dans toute sa vulnérabilité. Un serment qui, selon Levinas, lutte contre la tentation du sacré.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".