Cultural Diversity and Globalisation: An Intercultural Hermeneutical (Afri-can) Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In our today‘s global age one of the central challenges facing Africa is that of coming to terms positively with her cultural diversity. Furthermore Africa is confronted with the challenge of global cultural diversity that has been characteristic of our global age. One of the questions raised here is how can the intrinsic African cultural diversity be made comprehensible not only to non-Africans but also to Africans themselves? Talking of under-standing makes the issue a hermeneutical one. Hence the following questions, how can this hermeneutical challenge be mastered? What tools are required in order to accomplish this mission? Any efforts towards accomplishing this task must have to put many dimensions into consideration. These include, among other things, the historical, regional, political, economic, etc. Such efforts would imply not only Africa being occupied with herself culturally, she on the other side needs to become relevantly conscious of the implications of these cultural dynamisms, understand it with reference to herself and the rest of the global community and finally interpret this phenomenon from an African perspective. These are the issues being addressed in this paper.
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 | 0.028 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.077 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| 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".