MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132869655

Body-Psyche-Mind in the Self-Appropriation of the Subject: Complexifying Lonergan's Acount of Nature and Supernature

2014· dissertation· en· W7132869655 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Josephine McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTheological Perspectives and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)RealmOrder (exchange)Task (project management)ClassicismSystematic theologyCatholic theology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Body-Psyche-Mind in the Self-Appropriation of the Subject: Complexifying Lonergan’s Account of Nature and Supernature Mary Josephine McDonald Doctor of Theology Regis College and the University of Toronto 2014 Abstract In the opening page of Method in Theology, Bernard Lonergan expresses a concern that theology would understand its role at this important juncture in history—a time when the modern world enters a new realm of meaning, one that represents a shift from classicism to interiority. In order to fulfill its task of mediating “between a cultural matrix and the significance and role of a religion in that matrix,” Lonergan states that theology must understand that it is no longer a “permanent achievement,” but rather “an ongoing process.” In proceeding, therefore, theology must become acquainted with the “framework for collaborative creativity” in the “ongoing process” that Lonergan calls method. In addition, Lonergan emphasizes that “a contemporary method would conceive those tasks in the context of modern science, modern scholarship, modern philosophy....” This thesis has sought to “collaborate creatively” with “modern science” in order that both theology and the cultural context might be mutually enriched. By drawing on the insights of the science of neuroplasticity, this thesis undertakes the methodological task involved in developing an understanding of the bodily aspect of the human person in an interiority analysis. Within the eight functional specialties that Lonergan outlines in a contemporary method of theology, this work performs tasks within Foundations. While inclusive of Foundations, the primary goal of this work is the development of a theological anthropology. Development occurs by bringing to light the significance of the body in a theological anthropology. Lonergan’s question, “What in terms of human consciousness is the transition from the natural to the supernatural?” in “Mission and the Spirit,” along with his articulation of the body-psyche-mind relations in his principle of correspondence in Insight, provide the framework for this development. A developed understanding of the body’s role in the transition from the natural to the supernatural furthers Doran’s work on psychic conversion by including “body data” in the self-appropriation of the unconscious. Such an integration of the organic and psychic spontaneities with conscious operations increases the probability of authentic agency in the unfolding of the Reign of God.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.050
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicTheological Perspectives and PracticesFrench-language works237,207