MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153740258 · doi:10.1111/sjtg.12039

Passive revolution: A church‐military partnership in the <scp>P</scp>hilippines

2013· article· en· W2153740258 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Moxham, Miriam Grant

Bibliographic record

VenueSingapore Journal of Tropical Geography · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipHegemonyVariety (cybernetics)Power (physics)State (computer science)SociologyAction (physics)Political scienceNarrativePublic administrationLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Philippines, a Catholic social movement for local development and broad structural transformation, referred to as Basic Ecclesial Communities, offers a counter‐narrative to state development. Predicated on the power of networked local groups, the Diocese of San Carlos has taken the original concept and rescaled it, operating a variety of social‐action programmes at the diocese level. The focus of this paper is a unique partnership between the diocese and the Armed Forces of the Philippines, which has produced a number of measurable positive changes in under‐serviced areas. We remain uncertain, however, about the extent to which the church is cooperating with, or being co‐opted by, the military as it enters into partnership, and many members of the clergy share our scepticism. In this paper we draw upon Gramsci's concept of passive revolution (1971) as a means to conceptualize both the efforts of the church to reform society from within, and the reaffirmation of the hegemonic discourse that seems inevitable.

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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.021
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSingapore Journal of Tropical GeographySame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207