MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613046435 · doi:10.7202/1034375ar

Théologie de la libération et marxisme

2015· article· fr· W2613046435 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gregory Baum, Dominique Samuel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Community Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society in Latin America
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteur explique la signification du mouvement de la théologie de la libération et parle de ses origines et de son impact sur l’Église. La théologie de la libération est le produit de nouvelles expériences religieuses qui ont pris naissance parmi les chrétiens d’Amérique latine luttant pour la justice. Par la lecture et la pratique des Écritures, ils se sont aperçus que Dieu était du côté des pauvres, des opprimés et des proscrits : en un mot, de leur côté. Dans un deuxième temps, l’auteur examine le lien de la théologie de la libération avec le marxisme. Pour cela, il approfondit quatre thèmes qui sont partie intégrante de la théologie de la libération et qui ont des points communs avec la pensée marxiste : la critique de l’idéologie, la théorie de la dépendance, l’option préférentielle pour les pauvres et l’homme comme sujet de l’histoire. L’auteur conclut que la théologie de la libération s’est engagée dans un dialogue crucial avec le marxisme, qu’elle a enrichi par ce dialogue la compréhension des catégories bibliques et de la doctrine chrétienne, mais que son rapport au marxisme ne concerne que le domaine de l’analyse sociale; même là, ce rapport n’est que tangentiel.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.031
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Community DevelopmentSame topicReligion and Society in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207