Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the writings of a prominent contemporary environmental activist, Julia Butterfly Hill, in light of the resonance between her own account of her two year tree-sit atop a California redwood and motifs from the history of religions. Environmentalism is often derided as a new religion. Acknowledging this critique, the paper argues that, indeed, a significant part of Hill’s public appeal lies in the religious elements in her actions and ideas. Like Byzantine Stylite saints, her charisma is indebted to her asceticism. Hill’s environmentalism is not a new religion, but it is a manifestation of overlapping environmental and religious sensibilities. This religious environmentalism or environmental religiosity may be new but it draws on very ancient religious associations between nature and the sacred. If Hill is representative of a new eco-piety, her eco-piety is informed not only by these archaic and archetypal elements, it is also derived from and influenced by Christian piety. Finally, if asceticism generates charisma, it also generates heightened awareness and sensory sensitivity—in Hill’s case, the claim to be able to listen to her tree and the message of the forest.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".