Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theme of assimilation to God is present in many Platonic dialogues, though none of them treats it as its principal theme. Nevertheless, it was thought in antiquity that the imperative to assimilate to God as far as possible was the very core of Platonic ethics. The locus classicus for this doctrine was Theaetetus 176b, where assimilation to God is described as flight from this world. One objection to this ancient view, however, is that the Republic, arguably our most important source for Platonic ethics, does not appear to treat assimilation to God as one of its main themes. This thesis is an attempt to answer this objection and to show that assimilation to God is in fact a major theme of the Republic and that it conveys essentially the same message as Tht.176b. I argue that one of the reasons this has not been more widely recognized in modernity is that Plato chose to develop the theme of godlikeness in the Republic in stages following a classical ring-composed structure. This structure would have been more readily perceived by an ancient audience than it is by most readers of the dialogues today. Thus, it is only when we attend carefully to the architecture of the whole dialogue that the importance of assimilation to God in the Republic comes into full view.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".