Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book is a contemporary exploration of the many interrelated challenges that Indigenous Peoples face with respect to religious freedom in Canada.This is not an ethnographic examination of Indigenous religions, an analysis of the content of the many diverse and diachronic traditions within the colonially determined borders of Canada, or a detailed documentation of the historical mistreatment of Indigenous religions at the command of the Canadian state.It is a study of the state itself and how the present continues to be informed by the past.During the final stages of writing this book, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia, the first case of Indigenous religious freedom to be considered under the modern constitutional framework.The court's decision is both a clear and troubling reminder of the real and present threat to Indigenous religions in Canada and a sober affirmation of the need to answer the following: Why, in Canada today, is the realization of Indigenous religious freedom so challenging?This book is intentionally generalist in its approach.I am guided by the words of Lakota scholar Vine Deloria Jr (1933-2005), who wrote, "The age of the specialist is over, and the generalist must consume an increasing amount of material in order to make sense of the world." 1 For Deloria, the disciplinary boundaries which define modern academia do not capture the complex interconnectedness of our world, fragmenting something that is not, in nature, distilled into such bits and pieces.On this, the book draws on material from religious studies, Indigenous studies, cultural
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.549 | 0.308 |
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".