MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021142805 · doi:10.3138/tjt.23.1.47

Jürgen Moltmann, Karl Marx and God: An Unlikely Trinity

2007· article· en· W2021142805 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel E. Rossi-Keen

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicChristian Theology and Mission
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarxist philosophyPhilosophyConstructiveJudaismReligious studiesEpistemologyTheologyLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among scholars familiar with the work of Jürgen Moltmann there exists little debate that this most prominent of German theologians has been deeply influenced by Marxist categories of thought. Perhaps most notable and most obvious in this regard is the influence that the revisionist Marxist and Jewish atheist Ernst Bloch exacted upon Moltmann's first major work, Theology of Hope. Additional and subsequent impact was derived from Moltmann's involvement with the Christian-Marxist dialogue that gained prominence in the 1960s. Moltmann was . likewise deeply influenced by his critical and constructive involvement with the growth of Latin American Liberation Theology. Because of the debt owed to varied strains of Marxist thought by each of these persons or movements, consideration of the interplay between Marxism and Moltmann has been inevitable. In spite of this tendency, however, surprisingly little attention has thus far been focused on the connections that exist between Jürgen Moltmann's thought and Karl Marx's germinal writings on religion. Rather, the discussion has persistently centred around Moltmann's involvement with a variety of individuals or groups who have variously appropriated the work of Karl Marx.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.022
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicChristian Theology and MissionFrench-language works237,207