MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046377707

Completing the vision : Søren Kierkegaard's pseudonymous texts and Attack upon Christendom

2003· other· en· W7046377707 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2003
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSuperconducting and THz Device Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalogyRelation (database)DialecticReading (process)ScholarshipKey (lock)Culmination
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soren Kierkegaard's final Attack upon Christendom marks the common culmination of three of the most important themes evident in his earlier, pseudonymous books, namely the 'Leap', the 'Offence' and 'Indirect Communication.' Modern critical scholarship tends to take one of two approaches. Either Attack is dismissed as a deviation from Kierkegaard's previous writing, or Attack is read without sufficient regard for its dependence upon what has come before. Both approaches make an aberration out of the final work. This thesis proposes that reading Attack in light of its proper relation to the pseudonymous writings offers a more complete picture of the dialectical shape and development of Kierkegaard's thought. Employing Plato's analogy of the Cave in Republic as a hermeneutical tool, the thesis proposes an analogous 'ascent' in the pseudonyms out of the 'cave' of Christendom towards a vision of authentic Christianity. By the same analogy Kierkegaard completes the trajectory under his own name by a 'descent' from his vision back into the practical world of public engagement with his Attack. The thesis investigates the three key themes of Kierkegaard's oeuvre as they develop throughout the literature and are brought to fruition in Attack upon Christendom, and devotes a chapter each to the 'Leap', the 'Offence' and 'Indirect Communication'.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicSuperconducting and THz Device TechnologyFrench-language works237,207