MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772256117 · doi:10.3138/tjt.2017-0150

Singing as <i>Un Saber del Sur</i>, or Another Way of Knowing

2017· article· en· W2772256117 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Becca Whitla

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Studies and Colonialism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingingEmbodied cognitionPraxisIntellectualismEnlightenmentPhilosophySociologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, I show how one song, “El Espíritu de Dios,” can be a source of knowledge and an act of epistemic disobedience, even amid the increasingly complex dynamics of the “coloniality of music.” When it is sung in embodied ways from below, it affirms knowledge as something that emerges out of the oral tradition arising from the heart of a community's life and experience. It is understood to belong to the community, in this case multiple local Latin American communities. This embodied, oral, communal singing challenges prevailing Eurocentric norms that emphasize written texts, individual ownership, and rationalist intellectualism, represented in Euro-North-Atlantic epistemologies of the Enlightenment. When it is sung as a fully embodied holistic human expression, it instead actualizes an act of hope, another way of knowing, un saber del sur (knowledge from the South), which defies forces that oppress and the pervasiveness of coloniality. Who we are and who we want to become as active agents of a liberative praxis proclaiming what is and what ought to be, the already and not yet of the Reign of God, emerges. Understanding the dynamics of (de)coloniality in hymns and songs involves affirming songs like “El Espíritu de Dios,” which express an-other way of knowing and singing and a decolonial mode for doing theology.

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)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.023
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicCultural Studies and ColonialismFrench-language works237,207