Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is based on field work done during a period of eight months when I lived in the Japanese farming village described in the paper. The project was carried out under the financial auspices of the Japanese Government. The religion Tenrikyō is what I describe as a 'totalitarian' system. That is, it regulates the lives of its members in all of their roles of life. The values and ideals of the religion emphasize the individual and his struggle to attain salvation. Each believer is expected to devote himself and everything he owns to the final fullfillment of the goals of Tenrikyō. The values and goals in operation in village Japan are in direct opposition to values such as those outlined for the religion. Community solidarity is of utmost importance to a Japanese village. In order to attain this solidarity each member of the village must subject himself to the will of the community. Thus the village too may be described as a 'totalitarian' system. When Tenrikyō entered the village of Sakōdo the meeting of the two 'totalitarian' systems produced a conflict which the village attempted to solve by formally ostracising the converts to the religion. This action was not satisfactory since it resulted in a weakening of the inner strength of the community. The only recourse was to accept the religion and make it dependant upon the village. This action eventually destroyed the 'totalitarian' nature of the religion and strengthened that of the community. This paper is an examination of this conflict and compromise and illustrates the type of reaction which occurs upon the meeting of two 'totalitarian' systems which hold opposing values and ideals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".