<b>O Vento Sopra onde Quer: unção do riso</b>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artigo apresenta o fenômeno da Benção do Riso, ou Unção do Riso, surgida na Igreja Comunhão Divina de Toronoto, Canadá. Embora esse tenha sido o fenômeno que tornou o movimento conhecido para o mundo, há alusão que já havia relatos da Unção do riso em 1933, em escala menor, e em pequenas igrejas. Foi a partir de 1980, portanto, antes do episódio de Toronto, que a Unção do Riso chega ao Brasil por meio do Pastor Argentino Carlos Anacondia, que difundiu essa doutrina em inúmeras comunidades evangélicas. A Unção do riso é praticada no Brasil e no mundo por grupos pentecostais e neopentecostais, e também carismáticos. O artigo questiona as nuances do evento e suas contradições no ambiente cristão, tanto a nível religioso, teológico e litúrgico. The Wind Blows Where it Wishes: holy laughter This article discusses the phenomenon of the Holy Laughter (also known as Anointing of Laughter, Unction of Laughter, Anointing of Isaac, Toronto Blessing, etc.) that emerged in 1994 at the Holy Communion Church in Toronto, Canada. Despite that phenomenon rising the movement to worldwide fame, there are allusions to said Holy Laughter on accounts since 1933, on a smaller scale and on smaller churches. Firstly, we present the reality of laughter as present in the Judeo-Christian sacred texts and briefly some of its contemporary developments in satirical and humorous adaptations of the Christian bible. Afterwards we present how said Holy Laughter was positively held but also how it became target for harsh criticism by both religious groups and researchers. Lastly, we present how it may be interpreted as an authentic element of faith and worship, or as a cathartic psychological phenomenon led by religious leaders during Christian worship.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.009 |
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".