Bibliographic record
Abstract
Discussions of the work of Peter L. Berger allow one to reclaim, to reflect and to critique his sociological thinking from a Quebecois point of view. His works, among which The Sacred Canopy (1967) is essential, open, more particularly, the door to reflection on the place of the religious in the public sphere at the beginning of the 21st century and likewise enable a response to the question of the rapid change in the religious landscape in Quebec since the end of the 1960s. In this article, we present a description of two theoretical positions developed by Peter L. Berger in the 20th century, one favourable to the thesis of secularization, the other unfavourable. These opposed positions and criticisms of them within intellectual circles will also be briefly considered. Through a typology developed from the transformation of the religious landscape in Quebec in the 20th century, questions will then be raised about recent studies on secularization in Quebec. The Quebecois case provides nuance for Berger’s classical conception, while challenging and explaining the evolution of his theoretical positions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".