MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042777376 · doi:10.7202/005687ar

Cosmology and Native North American Mystical Traditions

2002· article· en· W2042777376 on OpenAlexaffvenue
John Grim

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMysticismPsychicIndigenousAestheticsSociologyEcologyLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different indigenous nations in North America provide examples of mystical participation in the processes of creation. Some observers dismiss native communities as fragmented or romantically reimaged as "ecological Indians", yet, the tenacity of their religious insights deserve attention. Intellectually framed in images of interactions between specific peoples with particular geographical places, these images are also embedded in dynamic performances. This paper presents a comparative study of mystical paths among First Peoples in which personal and communal symbols fuse psychic, somatic, and social energies with local landscapes. Experienced as synesthetic intuitions, these images are made more conscious in rituals. These dynamic performances link words, actions, sounds, sights, and sensory observations. Ritualized expressions of native mystical life are themselves interpretive reflections back upon the personal, communal, spiritual, and ecological realms from which they emerge. Native American religious ways, thus, are lifeway complexes that address the limits and problems of the human condition, and foster mature mystical understanding.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.012
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThéologiquesSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207