September 11, 2001: The Clash of Competing Worldviews
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cataclysm of September 11, 2001 created a universal reaction that the world would never be the same. Understandably, Washington unleashed a counterattack to find and extirpate the terrorists as an end in itself. But is terrorism essentially a senseless act of anarchy, or does it mask a malaise deeply held in various non-Western cultures? This paper contends that the horrendous events of September 11 precipitated a head-on clash of two competing worldviews and societal orders: Muslim Theism versus secularized Western Humanism. Meanwhile, the latter is in turn being challenged in a second set of competing worldviews, not at the former site of the World Trade Center but wherever the World Trade Organization meets. Those outside the fenced perimeter are calling for implementation of a very different view of reality. This new paradigm with its own emerging attributes-Holism-builds upon humanistic traditions and values, but extends to all societies and cultures, henceforth perceived as systemically interdependent, and embracing all forms of life in an ecological matrix. For the first time in human evolution, all peoples are simultaneously being transformed in the direction of a new worldview that is global in its inclusiveness, and novel and innovative in its behaviour.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it