Погляд Чарльза Тейлора на мультикультуралізм і свободу віросповідання: ключові проблеми
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor is one of the most important supporters, and theorists, of multiculturalism. According to Taylor, the accommoda- tions of generally applicable legal regulations to various communities is necessary because numerous regulations – apparently neutral – are not impartial from a cultural perspective, supporting the weaker position of minority groups in relation to the domi- nant culture. In the present paper the issue of the limits of the possible and legitimized «accommodations». In the book «Secularism and Freedom of Conscience» (2010) written by Taylor together with Jocelyn Maclure, the subjective approach to religion, which is aligned in terms of status with other views of conscience, gains strong sup- port. On the grounds of such an approach, however, the question of the limits of the legal protection of subjective religious feelings arises. Moreover, it seems that there are some tensions between the concept presented in Secularism and Freedom of Conscience and a more communitarian vision of religion – and religious freedom – defended by Taylor in his earlier book «Varieties of Religion Today» (2001). We must, therefore, ask whether these tensions do not undermine the whole theory of Taylor
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.008 |
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".