MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582200704 · doi:10.15173/nexus.v24i1.1098

The Power of Ideology: Religion and Environmental Consciousness in Prehistoric Societies

2016· article· en· W2582200704 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dylan S. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueNEXUS The Canadian Student Journal of Anthropology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyFaithEnvironmental ethicsHumanityConsciousnessPower (physics)PoliticsEnvironmental consciousnessEnvironmental degradationPolitical economySustainable developmentSociologyState (computer science)Political scienceEcologyLawEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People are defined by the environments in which they live. This article seeks to explain how environmentally-based ideologies help lead to the development of ecologically sustainable innovations. If the importance of nature is a core ideology of a society, measures will likely be taken to ensure sustainable usage of environmental resources. In times of short-term environmental instability, religious beliefs become strengthened due to successful rituals (e.g. prayers for rain coincide with the end of a period of drought). However, if poor conditions persist for long durations then faith in rituals will waver, leaving a society in a state of instability. Utilising various anthropological literature and two case studies (The Central Andes and Easter Island), the following conclusions are made: (1) ideology that emphasises human-environmental coexistence stresses the importance of the environment and leads to successful innovations that allow for humanity to thrive without doing irreversible damage to our surroundings; and (2) unpredictable and lengthy periods of negative environmental conditions can lead to the weakening of social, political, and economic constructs and their controlling ideologies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEXUS The Canadian Student Journal of AnthropologySame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207