MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Charles Taylor’s Work after A Secular Age

2018· book-chapter· en· W3125665976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Craig Browne, Andrew Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenueEdinburgh University Press eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyViewpointsPoliticsMulticulturalismSociologyImmigrationPolitical scienceSocial scienceHistoryLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter explores what Taylor has been working on since publishing A Secular Age. This includes his work on religious freedom, his contribution to a report for the Government of Quebec on diversity and multiculturalism in the province, and his study on language and its place and role in the political and social debates that are shaping our world. The chapter examines Taylor’s arguments about religious freedom and its importance for harmonious social conditions in modern societies that are struggling to negotiate the boundaries between the religious and the secular realms, particularly at a time when both religious and secular viewpoints remain important to many citizens in modern democracies. The chapter then provides an overview of Taylor’s work on a report for the Government of Quebec that was commissioned at a time of intense scrutiny in the province about the status of the French language, the maintaining of French cultural traditions, and issues to do with jobs and incomes as the region faces high levels of immigration and increased diversity. Taylor’s book The Language Animal is also examined, and his views about how we understand language as being expressive or functional is assessed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEdinburgh University Press eBooksSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207