MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137833435 · doi:10.3138/tjt.20.2.191

Paul Tillich' Encounter with the World Religions and the Emergence of a Cross-cultural Discourse Ethic (1954-1965)

2004· article· en· W2137833435 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Scott Kline

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsGrassrootsSuperpowerGlobalizationGeopoliticsEmpireSociologyReligious studiesEnvironmental ethicsLawPolitical economyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the 1960s and 1970s, amidst the struggle for civil rights, anti-war protests and liberation movements, few theologians and scholars of religion looked to Paul Tillich as someone who had something important to offer moral debates centred on race relations, gender equality, nuclear proliferation or grassroots revolutions. With a few exceptions, theologians and religious studies scholars since the 1980s have likewise tended to be reluctant to bring Tillich's sometimes abstract thought to bear on current social and political questions. In line with those who think that Tillich should be reread for his subtle and yet substantial contributions to ethics, and even to global politics, I contend that Tillich has much to offer thinkers of all stripes concerned with a world in which the global North has embraced economic globalization, prominent liberal academics such as Robert D. Kaplan, Michael Ignatieff and Samuel P. Huntington have promoted the theory that post-Cold-War conflicts will be primarily between ethnic groups and civilizations, a geopolitical situation in which the world's remaining superpower has developed a post-9/11 foreign policy of empire building, and, perhaps most seriously, a world in which ecological crises loom ever larger.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.038
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207