Le paradigme de la mort de Dieu dans les sciences humaines de la religion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prolongement de la philosophie des Lumières, l’épistémologie du soupçon s’est élaborée progressivement : Niestzsche, Marx et Freud en furent les principaux définisseurs. L’idée que Dieu n’existe pas en est le postulat de base. Chez Niestzsche, philosophe hédoniste, l’ascétisme en vue du Royaume est pourfendu, cependant que Marx considère Dieu comme l’âme des sociétés sans âme, opium des opprimés. Freud et Wilhelm Reich (La révolution sexuelle) qualifieront de névrose la croyance en un être purement imaginaire. Retraçant la présence diffuse de cette épistémologie « régnante » dans l’historiographie religieuse, cet essai étoffe l’idée que, croyants ou incroyants, les anthropologues du religieux ont l’obligation de reconnaître les effets de la croyance sur les populations étudiées.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".