MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029770265 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10136

A Comparative Grammar of Just War: Contrasting Augustinian Christian and Vedic Hindu Worldviews

2014· dissertation· en· W3029770265 on OpenAlex
Keith Gomes

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicViolence, Religion, and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHinduismMetaphysicsJust war theoryDoctrinePoliticsPhilosophyFaithReligious studiesEpistemologyLawSpanish Civil WarTheologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation examines some of the metaphysical assumptions that inform how people think about warfare. In the Christian West, rules on warfare developed into the just war doctrine, and St. Augustine is often acknowledged as the person who introduced these ideas to Western philosophy. However, all of Augustine's thought is rooted in his understanding of reality through the lens of his Christian faith -a fifth century Roman Catholic worldview (Weltanschauung). As a result, current norms in international law on warfare (such as R2P) also reflect these Christian metaphysical assumptions. This dissertation examines not only how Augustinian metaphysical assumptions impact our ideas of warfare in international law but also how these ideas would change if one did not subscribe to this Augustinian worldview. Since Hinduism is often associated with nonviolence, a Hindu worldview is examined to determine what kind of just war theory, if any, would arise. First, the link between Christian philosophy and modern international law is outlined, tracing the development of thought from Augustine to modern times by examining Bible verses and writings by political theorists and others on just war theory and Christian theology. Then, Christian metaphysical assumptions are examined in order to determine how these assumptions influence Christian ideas of warfare. Psychological impacts of Christian assumptions are also looked at through the lens of Girardian analysis. In the second half, Hindu political writings, scriptures and religious texts as well as books about Hinduism are examined to discover how Hindus have thought about war. Hindu metaphysical assumptions are examined and inferences are made to show the connection between these assumptions and Hindu ideas of non-violence. The following aspects are examined in order to see how they generate ideas about war: ontology, creation myths and conceptions about God, the afterlife and end of the world, axiology, praxeology and epistemology. The research shows that Christian metaphysical assumptions (which many Christians now consider outdated) continue to influence modern ideas about war idea while Hindu metaphysical assumptions tend to influence the kind of non-aggression associated with Gandhi.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicViolence, Religion, and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207