The making of Jewish authenticity: The hybrid discourse of authenticity of New Age Judaism and the complexities of religious individualization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article offers an ethnographically informed discussion of the hybrid discourse of authenticity of two New Age Judaism (NAJ) communities that were active in Israel in the beginning of the millennium. The article argues that the discourse of authenticity of the two communities was a hybrid discourse which interweaved two overlapping understandings of expressive authenticity: genealogical or historical (origin) and identity or correspondence (expressive content). The members of the communities aspired for self-realization and fulfillment by discovering their authentic self and at the same time articulated and legitimized their mission of renewal by referring to earlier, allegedly more spiritual time periods in Jewish history. This discourse is understood in terms of the “inward turn” and the “turn to tradition” of contemporary Jewish life as well as the penetration of consumer logic into Jewish forms of spirituality. As such it showcases the complexities of Jewish individualization whereby the focus on the self and self-authenticity is tightly linked to the cultivation of identity and communal belonging.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".