Religion in the public sphere: The Quebec charter of values, a critical reflection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary challenges on religious belief and practice occur often within democratic polities; they do appear as advocates for equality before law, state neutrality and for freedom of conscience. Such claims perceived as demands for equal justice mark the public sphere of the West thanks especially to an expanding consciousness of individual rights and increasing religious cultural diversity, a phenomenon due also to immigration. These are obvious signs of the Western society becoming more and more pluralistic, but in a way distinct from such traditional polities elsewhere. Whatever the advantages of a pluralist society, it is also seen as a potential threat to entrenched values. How would then a democratic regime deal with multiculturalism and religious freedom, guaranteeing social coherence and security, becomes a crucial contemporary issue. Employing the Quebec Charter of Values as a case in point, this essay highlights the importance of re-defining the public sphere. It has to be a discursive sphere which would only materialize when rationality and emotions play an equal role, in shaping the social body, especially through narratives. And religions do seem to have an important role to play here, not only in shaping a strong, open self-identity, but also in recognizing the common, human vulnerability.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".