MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184349169 · doi:10.1558/rsth.v34i1.26901

Calvinist Case for Tolerant Public Pluralism

2015· article· en· W2184349169 on OpenAlex
John Hiemstra

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

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Education and Schools
Canadian institutionsThe King's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerationPluralism (philosophy)CalvinismDemocracyPoliticsLegitimacySociologySovereigntyPublic reasonLawEpistemologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Religiously generated conflict and intolerance around the world challenge the idea that religion can generate support for plurality, religious freedom, genuine toleration and democracy. Some argue, for example, that Islam is incompatible with democracy. This article argues that each religious tradition must explore its internal resources for how they might generate and support toleration and democracy. I explore the case of neo-Calvinism which shares a belief in God’s sovereignty with Islam, yet strongly supports religious freedom, toleration and democracy. The Dutch neo-Calvinist leader, Abraham Kuyper (1837–1920) developed distinctive political ideas consistently based on Christian beliefs. This article opens by examining Calvin’s thought for intolerant political ideas. It presents Kuyper’s rationale for the legitimacy of “reforming” earlier Christian ideas and actions. The majority of the article analyzes Kuyper’s rationale for “tolerant public pluralism” in order to show how neo-Calvinist beliefs systematically shaped his political thinking.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.291 · 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