Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the spiritual and economic reasons behindHomo sapiens' misuse and destruction of the biotic web. Through the argument that we are a self‐seeking, opportunistic species that now acts out our domination of the planet without restraint, attention to given to the motivations for such actions. To counter the downward spiral of rampant exploitation, consumption and poverty, by presenting the religious environmental perspectives that can be used to stem the process of global environmental devastation. Design/methodology/approach The methodologies utilized are ecosophical, ecofeminist, comparative religious discourse, and structural functionalist. Findings The issues are overwhelming without a strong moral, environmental foundation. The power to effect the practical, widespread changes necessary can be derived from the ancient concepts of the sacred, or the concept of inherent worth, within all life forms. These concepts can and do combat the exploitive materialism of our global economies and could change the way the “system” works. Practical implications The paper identifies the root causes of our environmental dysfunction and presents the potential within the religious environmental perspectives. These perspectives can be used as a means to create a practicalmodus operandifor the practitioner of religion and the policy maker. Originality/value The paper presents the reality of environmental degradation and, through environmental spirituality, offers a valid alternative to the maximum trade growth and systemic global consumer mentality. Using ancient concepts, it establishes a viable avenue of dialogue between religious communities and business for the benefit of all.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".