Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ey! Wie ein undoctorliche rede ist das!"With these words, Philip Melanchthon put a visiting scholar at Martin Luther's table in his place when it came to the question of time.The story, which comes to us from several sources, goes like this.The Luthers were entertaining an out-of-town (perhaps foreign) guest and had invited Melanchthon and Justus Jonas, another Wittenberg professor, to dine with them.After dinner, talk turned to the question of measuring and understanding time and calendars.The visiting doctor exclaimed that such concerns were foolish; the farmers in his parish needed no calendar or star chart to tell them when it was summer or winter.Luther shot a glance at Melanchthon, worried that Wittenberg's logician, known for his sharp tongue, might let the poor man have it.Instead, Melanchthon replied with a single remark -and in German no less -rather uncharacteristic for Germany's premier Latinist but done perhaps so that the man could not understand him."Ey! Wie ein undoctorliche rede ist das!" ("Oy, what an unprofessorial comment that is!")In one of his own accounts of the story, Melanchthon added, "I wanted to say, 'It is a dumb jackass remark.'"Another account of the incident noted that throughout the rest of the evening, Jonas and Luther would repeat Melanchthon's remark to each other as a joke. 2 For Melanchthon, a man who owned a pocket watch, studied the stars, composed poems to commemorate eclipses, and wrote an enormously popular world history, time and history were no laughing matters.Instead, they gave human beings a glimpse of God's work in the world as it lurched toward final judgment.Time and history also served humanity in its quest to govern life in this world.Only human creatures possessed a sense of time.Thus, to give proper tribute to a fellow church historian, it behooves us to consider the contributions of Wittenberg's other reformer on this important topic.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".