Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation is concerned with the ways in which Tibetans living in Dharmsala, Northern India, react to events such as illness, personal distress, and misfortune, when they perceive such events as disturbances to a given social and moral order and as evidence of "spirit attack". To re-establish the order, the context moves/widens from a concern with an afflicted individual to include more general political issues and finally focuses on the legitimation of authority. Dharmsala Tibetans live in a hierarchical society and subscribe to a hierarchical cosmos. The ideology places responsibility upon humans for aligning this hierarchy and prescribes the legitimate means by which the hierarchy may be ascended. Two efficient causes of illnesses result in spirit attack: (1) the first attributes spirit attack to human violation of hierarchical tenets; (2) the second, to the illegitimate status ambitions of evil spirits. The logic of the ritual cure addresses the resolution of status ambiguities. Successful ritual cures are appreciated in terms of two idioms denoting two aspects of charismatic authority. When the spirit attack results from human violation of hierarchical tenets, the patient's cure is contingent upon his or her unsystematically acquired power (rlung-rta). When the second efficient cause obtains and evil spirits are responsible for the attack, the patient's cure depends upon the outcome of a duel between an exorcist and the spirit(s), and the successful cure is described in terms of systematically acquired power (dbang). These idioms serve not only to legitimate status in Tibetan society, but also to rationalize hierarchical ascent. In addition to ritual curing, the idioms are employed in assessing the outcomes of events such as sports, gambling, and weather-making. Where the idioms overlap moral ambiguities emerge. The two idioms are discernible in much of Tibetan history where they focus upon the legitimation of succession to charismatic office. The idiom of unsystematically acquired power appears to predominate in the present refugee context.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".