The Crisis of the Fisheries in Newfoundland and Labrador and the Notion of the Common Good in David Hollenbach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis offers an extended theological reflection on the notion of the common good, in light of the decimation of the world’s largest cod fishery in the waters off the northeast coast of Newfoundland and Labrador. Drawing on Church and local political history, this thesis argues that the theological notion of the common good would have provided the theological perspective for Catholic Church-local leaders to see this socio-economic-ecological crisis as a spiritual crisis, a one which summoned the active engagement of the Church. The destruction of the northern cod fishery in the latter half of the twentieth century is considered through the lens of David Hollenbach’s reinterpreted notion of the common good in Catholic social tradition. Hollenbach’s common good re-envisioned, offers a way of articulating and reflecting on the theological-ethical insufficiency of the local Church’s response to this socio-economic-ecological-political-spiritual tragedy. Despite the long-standing tradition of the Catholic Church to interpret, define and advance the needs of the common good of all humanity, that Vatican II had happened, and was followed by more than fifteen years of Canadian Catholic Bishops social justice statements, Newfoundland Church leaders in the late twentieth century, did not see it appropriate to become involved in this immense political, socio-economic-ecological, cultural-spiritual travesty of justice. Hollenbach’s common good reinterpreted presses this Church-local to be the people of God, and awaken to the spirit of aggiornamento, affirmed at Vatican II. Active commitment to Catholic social teachings on respect for human dignity, love, solidarity, sharing, and mutual responsibility, can only empower this Church by the sea to unite its aspirations with the needs of the common good of these maritime people.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".