MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2265155586 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.26.2.259

Invented Religions: Imagination, Fiction and Faith

2014· article· en· W2265155586 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Charles McCrary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularizationFaithContext (archaeology)IndividualismArgument (complex analysis)Religious studiesHistoryLiteratureAestheticsSociologyArtPhilosophyTheologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cusack, Carole M. Religions: Imagination, Fiction and Faith. Surrey, England: Ashgate, 2010. 179 + viii pp. 55.00 [pounds sterling], $89.95. Cloth. ISBN: 978-0-7546-6780-3 Carole Cusack's Religions examines six recently religions: Discordianism, the Church of All Worlds, the Church of the SubGenius, Jediism, Matrixism, and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Because these religions have received little to no attention from scholars, Cusack's work is a very valuable contribution. However, the book itself is at times frustrating, and Cusack's analysis is occasionally sharp but often muddled. ideas around which the book is organized are provocative and enticing. Invented Cusack's chosen category, refers to those and organizations that, most important, announce their invented status (1). distinguishes them from other new religious movements (NRMs) that purport to be true. religions are meant as commentaries on the category of religion itself, knowingly parodying common religious themes and specific religions. first chapter, The Contemporary Context of Religion, sets the terms for the argument and analysis. Cusack emphasizes the role of secularization in the West, especially in the last fifty years. Relying primarily on Peter Berger and Charles Taylor, she links secularization with consumerism and individualism--resulting in the condition wherein belief is a personal choice (11) and the rise of NRMs, Asian religions and their offshoots in the West, and New Age. is all well and good, but Cusack quickly takes the study in the wrong direction. Strangely, she decides to take up the question of whether or not they really count as religions, rather than situating invented religions as perceptive and clever critiques of these cultural shifts. Cusack writes, This study argues that invented religions are neither trivial nor necessarily invalid (3). What validity could possibly mean in this context is not discussed, but some functionalist definition is at work. religions are valid because, like real religions, they pique curiosity, and send the imagination soaring (5), and their narratives fire the imagination of certain people (125). Discordianism, the Church of All Worlds, and the Church of the each receive their own chapter. In these chapters Religions is most compelling. founders of these are invariably fascinating characters with insightful, cheeky, and often sarcastic critiques of twentieth-century consumerism and religion. The Church of the SubGenius (COSG), for example, relentlessly parodies existing religions, particularly megachurch Christianity and Scientology (84). …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.302
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

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
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and Popular CultureSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207