MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026793706 · doi:10.1163/174551911x571067

Redistribution and Reciprocity: A Socio-Economic Interpretation of the Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20.1-15)

2010· article· en· W2026793706 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Vearncombe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Historical Jesus · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedistribution (election)ObligationEconomicsReciprocity (cultural anthropology)PaymentDebtPositive economicsAnalogyLaw and economicsSociologyMicroeconomicsLabour economicsLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyEpistemologySocial scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract While Matthew's parable of the labourers in the vineyard (20:1-15) is generally regarded as an analogy whereby the goodness of God is contrasted with human notions of justice and reward, when the socio-economic background of the parable is more fully taken into account, specifically the contexts of redistribution and reciprocity, it becomes clear that the parable functions on another level as well. The payment of an equal wage to all labourers regardless of time worked initiates a conflict between the landowner and the full-day workers due to the disruption of economic expectation which the equal payment represents. The parable reverses the worldly economic values of profit and self-interest and aims to demonstrate the possibility of a different kind of social obligation, one based not on debt but on more balanced forms of reciprocity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of the Historical JesusSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207