La ruptura entre el orden inmanente y el orden trascendente según Charles Taylor: Propuestas para un tiempo de síntesis en clave hegeliana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For Charles Taylor, the great invention of the West is the establishment of an immanent order in nature. An immanent order that implied denying any form of connection between the things of nature and the supernatural by another, whether understood as a transcendent God, or the world of spirits or magical forces. Even defining religion in terms of the distinction between immanent and transcendent is a division tailored to our modern culture and one that for our Canadian hermeneutic such a distinction has become foundational. What’s more, for the first time in the modern West, starting with post-Galilean science, the immanent order becomes the background of all our thinking. A double movement towards immanence is produced from responsible reason and the natural order that leads to the establishment of a new moral order of Modernity: a world as containment of instincts and a personalization of the self through the psyche, interiority rational and disciplined self-control. Everything is reduced to a chained succession of autonomous causalities, in which there is hardly any room left for questions of a transcendental nature. Faced with the epistemology of Cartesian and dualist mediation that ends in naturalistic scientism and against the imperial claims of omnimodal mechanism and omnipresent technology, Taylor’s philosophical project is a project that seeks to reconstruct modern identity from a vision totalizing in a Hegelian key, universal in scope.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".