Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper assesses the ongoing dialogue and student exchangebetween the Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) and one ofthe most violent institutions in Iran, the Imam Khomeini Educationand Research Institute (IKERI). I will use this relationshipbetween theMCC and IKERI to examine the broader question ofinterreligious transnational dialogue and peacemaking.After a brief background of this somewhat “secretive” dialogue/student exchange, I will evaluate its effects. Of particular interestwill be the following questions: How do we responsibly shapeMuslim–non-Muslim dialogue for peace and understanding in aglobal context that is inevitably shaped by an imbalance of powerand representation? How are the acts of resistance undertaken bythe disenfranchised local/diasporic Iranian communities and thesustained systematic violence against them impacted by a peacefulfaith community such as the Mennonites? How does the absolutizationof “dialogue” coupled with self-proclaimed theologicalmandates effectively strip away the archives of violence from livingmemories and histories?What can examining the decade-longdialogue between the MCC and IKERI reveal about the mechanismsof perpetuation and dissimulation of imperial dominationand control? How can transnational interreligious interventions bethe nexus for infusing sensitivity and expecting accountability?I argue that a fetishization of dialogue and a commodification ofpeacemaking took place between the MCC and IKERI, resultingin the patronage of the sign systems of existing normative ideologiesof violence ...
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".