MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W776825612

What's the Trouble with Human Rights?

2013· article· en· W776825612 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Howard A. Doughty

Notice bibliographique

Revue˜The œinnovation journal · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLawFaithSupreme courtSociologyFundamentalismOpposition (politics)CourageLegislationPolitical sciencePoliticsTheologyPhilosophy
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Books discussed:Irshad Manji.The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith. New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 2005.Irshad Manji.Allah, Liberty and Love: The Courage to Reconcile Faith and Freedom. New York: Free Press, 2011.Karima BennouneYour Fatwa Does Not Apply Here: Untold Stories from the Fight Against Muslim Fundamentalism New York: W. W. Norton, 2013.Two important cases regarding the constitutional right to same-sex marriage are being brought to the United States Supreme Court for decision in 2013. Whether the court will choose to hear them, and what decisions may be made are not known at the time of writing. I do not think, however, that the ultimate outcome is in much doubt. Despite plaintive cries from religious fundamentalists and other cultural conservatives, I am confident that same-sex marriage will become the law of the land ... though maybe not quite yet. Enthusiasts of such legislation as the Defense of Marriage Act and traditional arguments that marriage be limited to a union of one man and one woman are adamant in their opposition, but public opinion polls show that as many as four out of five young Americans favour reform. Time will tell which side prevails and time certainly seems to be on the side of those who favour a more inclusive definition of marriage.The winds of change are blowing, but the deep currents are strong and hard to turn. Immediate predictions about both moral and legal judgements on the matter of same-sex marriage will, therefore, turn on whether you prefer an atmospheric or an oceanic metaphor. That is, whether you believe that recent changes of opinion will be strong enough to prevail over well entrenched beliefs. Despite reluctance in some cultural and religious quarters, however, the future of gay and lesbian, as well as bisexual and transgender (GLBT) people looks much like the future of women and African-Americans looked a century or so ago, at least in the United States of America.The same cannot be said about those parts of the world in which the dominant religion is Islam. There is, of course, no monolithic Muslim culture. The religion itself is, like its sibling Abrahamic religions of Judaism and Christianity, internally divided. A great schism between Sunni and Shi'ite factions and all manner of other sectarian distinctions ensures that no one speaks with uncontested authority for Islam (though many claim the authority to do so). Nonetheless, there is a perceptible difference-overlaps and innumerable exceptions notwithstanding-between what may conveniently be called Western Civilization on the one hand and Islam on the other. While there may be a robust debate among Christian leadership and laity alike, for example, an apparent agreement among Muslims on the matter seems relatively stable and, in many places, open discussion of the issue is almost unthinkable.To help its readers understand how the issues of sexual orientation and same-sex marriage play out globally, my local newspaper recently published a map of the world. On it, three features were graphically displayed for each country. They were:persecution of homosexuals (official sanctions from none to the death penalty);legal recognition of same-sex unions (from none to full marriage equality);civil protection (from none to civil and criminal laws against discrimination).The results revealed few surprises. The countries where gays and lesbians are subject to the least persecution, enjoy full recognition and receive the most legal protection are: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. They are closely followed by Australia, Austria, Brazil, Colombia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.On the other hand, those countries in which gays and lesbians suffer the most official persecution with the least recognition and protection are Iran, Mauritania, (northern) Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, (southern) Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,947
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,301
Écart entre enseignants0,275 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revue˜The œinnovation journalMême sujetAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsTravaux en français237 207