Constructions of Time, Place and Space in Aboriginal Christianity: Spiritual Common Grounds and Disputed Territories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inter-cultural religious development is an ongoing phenomenon that continues to provide relevant examples in today's world. As a result of this dynamic, many Aboriginal cultures known to have adopted the religion of the colonial state have retained much of their traditional spirituality, in both thought and practice. Aboriginal Christianity draws on traditional indigenous interpretations of time, place and space, which functions to separate it from classic European modes of Christianity. Time, place, and space, as fundamental dynamics of environment, are generally viewed by modern Europeanized society as indisputable, empirical expressions, or more specifically as the quantifying constructions of a secularized world. In actuality, much of our mainstream understanding of these dynamics has roots in Christian theology; ideas of time, place, and space in an Aboriginal context have been and continue to be seen as inextricably tied to the spiritual order of the universe. This presentation analyzes the extent to which time, place, and space implicate themselves as demarcations of relationship between the spiritual and the physical in Aboriginal traditions and European Christianity, with emphasis upon the intersection of belief found within Aboriginal Christianity. In addition, an analysis will be made of the role that the “spirituality of the relational environment” plays in refining Western colonial ideology.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.061 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".