MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6911513496 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.12572482

All Things Flow Into Form (Fanwu liuxing 凡物流形)

2024· article· en· W6911513496 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubricBambooSTRIPSWork flowSubject (documents)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Fanwu Liuxing 凡物流形 ("All Things Flow into Form") is a bamboo text within the "Shanghai strips" collection. This collection consists of a number of bamboo texts that were purchased by the Shanghai Museum (Shanghai Bowuguan 上海博物館) in 1994. Most likely, the texts were looted from a tomb and, as such, their provenance is unknown. However, similarities between the Shanghai strips and the Guodian strips excavated in 1993 suggest a tentative dating for the Shanghai strips of 300-278 BCE. For a more detailed description of the Shanghai strips, see the entry on the "Zigao 子羔" by Sarah Allan. The Fanwu Liuxing was previously unknown to scholars as it was not part of the "received tradition," the body of textual materials passed down and recopied over the course of Chinese history. However, the Shanghai collection contains two manuscripts of the text, suggesting the early import of the text. Of the two manuscripts, one, Manuscript B, is damaged and the total length of the text is 30 bamboo strips. As with most excavated materials, the Fanwu Liuxing is not easily classified according to the "schools" rubric of later history. Instead of appearing as a work of Daoism, Confucianism, etc., the text appears to stand on its own as a cosmogonic work that endeavours to explain the cosmos according to a single origin that it terms the "One" (yi 一). Together with other excavated texts such as the Taiyi Shengshui 太一生水, Hengxian 恆先, and Guodian Laozi 老子, it thus appears to be representative of the "cosmogonic turn" in early Chinese thought, meaning the shift that appears to have occurred in early texts from advancing theistic explanations of the cosmos to advancing monistic and naturalistic explanations. Of these early works, the Laozi is the only one to have been passed down in the later tradition and appears to have been the winner of this early debate. The Fanwu Liuxing itself may have been excluded from the later tradition because its arguments were integrated into, and appropriated by, the Laozi in the course of its textual evolution. This process can be reconstructed through excavated versions of the Laozi, though later editing can obscure the evidence for in the received version of the text. More specifically, the Fanwu Liuxing is structured into two parts. The first contains a series of questions on a range of subjects, including the basic constituents of the world and how they take form, the nature of human beings and their formation, the relationship of human beings and ghosts with reference to sacrifices, concerns over rulership, specific aspects of the natural world, and various divinities (all of whom are subordinated to the original origin of the cosmos). The second part of the text provides an answer to these questions in the form of a description of the One and the way in which it both gives rise to the cosmos and also remains immanent within it so that it may function. The text emphasizes that, because the One is simply the totality of all things, it can be grasped through the senses and understood through the heart-mind. It concludes by arguing that if a ruler is able to grasp the One through self-cultivation then he will be able to create political order. The text thus draws a direct line between its cosmogonic explanations and the practical exercise of political power.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicChinese history and philosophy→French-language works237,207→