Sensing religion, observing religion, reconstructing religion: Contingency and pluralization in post-Westphalian context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article argues that what is performed and understood as religion in global society has in the course of the modern centuries come to be increasingly dominated by the idea that religion is something distinct and differentiated, something distinct from what is not religion, namely the secular. It manifests itself principally as a plurality of identified and performed religions. Towards the latter half of the 20th century, however, that dominant understanding of religion has come to be increasingly challenged by alternative ways of ‘sensing religion’, alternative ways that are to some extent a reflection of new developments in this domain of religion in global society. They are also indicative of a reassessment of alternative ways of understanding and doing religion that have always accompanied the dominant sense. This reassessment allows the ‘hidden’ and ‘ignored’ to appear as religion and be recognized as such without negating the hitherto dominant form. The first of these developments is analyzed as the construction of a Westphalian system for religion; the reassessment and transformation is discussed under the contrasting idea of a post-Westphalian circumstance.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".