Influência e contribuição: a igreja católica progressista brasileira e o fórum social mundial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Desde o começo dos anos 1980, a Igreja Católica Progressista organizou e influenciou as práticas, as ideias e os objetivos da sociedade civil brasileira. A proposta do presente artigo consiste em analisar as diferentes maneiras pelas quais a Igreja Católica Progressista influenciou o Fórum Social Mundial (FSM). Os dois principais eixos de análise são, primeiro, a influência dos princípios, da visão de mundo e da metodologia da Igreja Católica Progressista sobre indivíduos e organizações da sociedade civil que estiveram envolvidos na concepção e na realização do FSM e, segundo, a participação da Igreja Católica Progressista no FSM através de organizações ligadas à Igreja Católica, forçando a inclusão da agenda da Igreja Progressista naquela do FSM. O artigo analisa como e por que a Teologia da Libertação e a Igreja Popular brasileiras influenciaram as ideias que levaram à criação e organização do FSM, além de discutir em detalhe a participação da Igreja Católica Progressista nas edições subsequentes do Fórum.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".