Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Anthropology has traditionally been associated with a relativistic understanding of moral issues, a position which is increasingly problematic in a period of globalization. The creation of an international community sharing the language of human rights and the values of liberalism considerably complicates the way anthropologists now have to think about the specific cultures with which they become engaged. Local understandings of culture, which anthropologists have hitherto emphasized, no longer seem to do justice to the demands of globalization, in which local law and custom are subsumed under international treaties and universal human rights legislation. Contentious issues such as child prostitution raise important concerns about whether a universal morality can exist and, if it can, what form it takes and whether it can, or should, be codified. The local knowledge of the anthropologist now has to engage with the universalizing propensity of international law and transnational obligations. The issue of child prostitution problematises this new perspective not least by emphasizing how local variations and traditions challenge any simplistic reduction of local phenomena to universal facts. The idea of children selling sex provokes such feelings of abhorrence that one would expect child prostitution to be an area in which any potential conflict between ‘rights’ and ‘culture’ is easily resolved. One would accordingly argue that children have an overwhelming right to be protected from prostitution, and that there can be no place for a debate in which issues of culture, social background or local realities are taken into account.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".