MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320117999 · doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfs040

Myth and the Christian Nation: A Social Theory of Religion. By Burton L

2012· article· en· W2320117999 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leif E. Vaage

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Religion · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyEquinoxReligious studiesSociologySocial theoryTheologyClassicsHistorySocial sciencePhilosophyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is neither the first nor the last book in which Burton L. Mack has brought his scholarly expertise as a New Testament scholar, historian of Second Temple Judaism and Christian origins, and theorist of religion to bear upon other matters of very contemporary concern. These other matters are, specifically, the current political situation in the United States with its attendant cultural (de-)formations and preoccupying peculiarities. Thus, I find it helpful to begin this review of the book Myth and the Christian Nation (2008) by placing it within the series of works that both precede and follow it, starting with A Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins (1988) and ending, most recently, with Christian Mentality: The Entanglements of Power, Violence, and Fear (2011). When taken up in this fashion, a certain intellectual trajectory or line of inquiry becomes apparent in which the present book—Myth and the Christian Nation—would register an important but nonetheless still provisional theoretical way-station.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.313 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of ReligionSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207