MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084144415 · doi:10.1080/1356931032000167463

Athens versus Jerusalem: a source of left-right conflict in the history of ideas

2004· article· en· W2084144415 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Political Ideologies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersLG Display
KeywordsIdeologyPoliticsFaithCONTESTSecularizationMeaning (existential)SociologyPower (physics)CreativityMetaphorEpistemologyOrder (exchange)AestheticsLawEnvironmental ethicsPhilosophyPolitical scienceTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ancient conflict commonly called ‘Athens versus Jerusalem’ was not just about reason versus faith but more importantly was about the idea in ‘Athens’ of a pre-ordered universe versus the idea in ‘Jerusalem’ of the creative spontaneity of God's self-sufficient will. This ancient intercultural contest became modernized and secularized as the idea of spontaneous creativity increasingly came to be seen as a human power. Meanwhile, the idea of universal order was renewed in the scientific revolution. Today, a legacy of the conflict between ‘Athens’ and ‘Jerusalem’ in its modern form is manifested in the ideological conflict over the ultimate source of lawfulness and goodness. Thus one of the ideological cleavages in the politics of contemporary democracies is on the question, are the rules that govern human life to be discovered or are they to be created by human beings? The left–right metaphor in politics has no inherent meaning but some of its conventional connotations are related to this conflict of worldviews.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.300 · 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