Divinity in Akan Proverbs: The Concept of God
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper assesses the Akan conception of divinity as reflected in their proverbs. It considers the attribute of God from the lens of the Akan as highlighted in their proverbs and its bearing on their religious beliefs. The paper is a dilation of the Akan concept of God before the arrival of the early missionaries. It considers how the concept of divinity found manifestation in the Akan proverbs. This is because a society’s conception of God is the focal point that navigates their religious beliefs and beyond that, their socio-political endeavors (Agyarko, 2013). Human society’s perception of God and divinity forms the bases to direct their spheres of life. The Akan society has a belief not only in the supreme being but other supernatural creatures thus by divinity, the paper discusses the placement of the supreme being in relation to other deities in the framework of the Akan proverbs. Against the background of the complexity of the social life of the Akan society, the paper seeks to draw a relationship between the Akan conception of divinity and human behavior through the construction and conceptualization of divinity in Akan proverbs. To attain this, thirty (30) proverbs were sourced from the Akan setting and analysis made through focus group discussion to the conclusion that Akan perceive the Supreme Being to have sharable and non-sharable attributes. Moreover, most of the contemporary beliefs in religion have a close bond with the Akan concept of divinity which according to Idowu (1973), Olupona (1990), Bowler (1990), Geertz (2009) were described as primitive, retrogressive, fetish and superstitious.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".