MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057546862 · doi:10.1163/156851508x328189

Moses and Abraham Go Arctic

2008· article· en· W2057546862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christina Petterson

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblical Interpretation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGospelIndigenousBiblical studiesIdentity (music)Postcolonialism (international relations)HistoryNew TestamentColonialismSimple (philosophy)DanishChristianityLiteratureGenealogySociologyPhilosophyClassicsGender studiesArtAestheticsEpistemologyArchaeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper reads the Gospel of John as expounded by Musa W. Dube in her article 'Savior of the World but not of This World: A Post-Colonial Reading of Spatial Construction in John' alongside the religious situation in contemporary Greenland, itself an often ignored example of the dilemmas of colonisation and postcolonialism. Tensions between the Danish Lutheran State Church and anti-Danish members of the indigenous Inuit populations over the place of Christianity in contemporary Inuit identity are analogous to the tension in John's gospel over who can claim to be Israel. In making this comparison, I hope not to exemplify what David Jobling warns us about: "Simple links between biblical and current situations, whether they leave the Bible looking good or bad, convey no lasting benefit." I seek to overcome the theoretical problems inherent in blindly adopting Dube's intertextual methods by employing Jonathan Z. Smith's observations on comparison. This in turn poses another range of problems about identity and method for readers as well as for the text which will be outlined here. Both the New Testament and the contemporary situation reveal the complexity of identities which simple categories of 'coloniser' and 'colonised' do not encompass.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.336 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblical InterpretationSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207