MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The geopolitics of Buddhist reincarnation: contested futures of Tibetan leadership

2012· article· en· W2098887878 on OpenAlexaff
Fiona McConnell

Bibliographic record

VenueArea · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsPoliticsLegitimacyBuddhismPolitical scienceLawPower (physics)SociologyReincarnationPolitical economyTheologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In attending to a religion and a region often overlooked in critical geopolitics, this paper examines the intersections between issues of legitimacy, agency and authority, and the case ofTibetanBuddhism. Buddhist values and political policies are deeply intertwined in the Tibetan case, to the extent that the political philosophy ofTibet – both prior to 1959 and in exile – ischos srid gnyis ldan, or ‘religion and politics combined’. Central to this conflation has been the figure of theDalaiLama who, since 1642, has been the spiritual and political leader of Tibet. However, in March 2011, the current and 14thDalaiLama declared his retirement from political life and devolution of political power to the directly elected exilePrimeMinister (KalonTripa). Six months later, HisHoliness issued a statement on the future of his own successor, declaring that he has the ‘sole legitimate authority’ over the reincarnation of the nextDalaiLama. Within days theChinese Government responded by declaring that ‘the title ofDalaiLama is conferred by the central government and is illegal otherwise’. In historically contextualising and critically analysing these recent events, this paper challenges conventional transpositional mappings of secular modernity and religious traditionalism onto theChinese andTibetan leadership respectively. It concludes by making the case for a more sustained critical geopolitical engagement withBuddhist communities, leaders and politics.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.050
Scholarly communication0.0140.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations23
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAreaSame topicReligious Tourism and SpacesFrench-language works237,207