Religion as Communication in Niklas Luhmann’s. Die Religion der Gesellschaft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zusammenfassung Luhmanns Umschalten auf Kommunikation als dem sozialen Grundelement seiner Theorie der Gesellschaft legt die Frage nahe, wie er Religion als Kommunikation verstanden hat. Der folgende Beitrag geht dieser Frage anhand aller Luhmmannschen Veröffentlichungen über Religion, insbesondere aber mit Blick auf seinen letzten posthum veröffentlichten Band nach. Die Analyse zeigt, daß Luhmann zweierlei Arten religiöser Kommunikation unterschieden hat. Zum einen gibt es die paradoxe Art religiöser Kommunikation: Kommunikation, die auch keine Kommunikation ist, vor allem Riten, Mythen, und Offenbarungsereignisse. Diesen Typ betrachtet Luhmann als problematisch, da er nicht klar zwischen Information und Mitteilung unterscheidet. Zum anderen gibt es Kommunikation über diese paradoxe Art der religiösen Kommunikation, und zwar Interpretationen, Kommentare, Spekulationen usw. Diese Art religiöser Kommunikation ist “normal”.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".