Dynamics of ideas about the process of secularization in socio-philosophical discourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The article analyzes the process of secularization of Western European society as a source of world secularism from the point of view of a Russian modern philosopher Grigory Borisovich Gutner and a Canadian philosopher, cultural historian Charles Margrave Taylor. Theoretical analysis. The purpose of this article, first of all, is not only the analysis of secularism as such, but also an attempt to understand the ways out of its coordinate system, which has driven itself into its own trap. The works of scientists help us to comprehend the reasons for the origin of this ideological concept, to understand in detail the pre-secular period, and to assess the current stage of public consciousness. What contributed to the cardinal change of the dominant in the ratio of the importance of the secular and spiritual? How did it happen that the centuries-old scale, on which the fundamental postulate of the idea of Divine design lay unshakably, suddenly gave way to the rationalism of scientific knowledge and experimental research? Why did the separation of science from theology, as a result, disintegrate all spheres of life, transforming it from a parallel area into the area of God-denial and God-fighting? What are the prospects for the development of the inner man, the formation of his mental and spiritual and moral qualities against the background of the rapid development of technological progress? Conclusion. In conclusion, the assessment of today’s time, relative to secular and post-secular processes, based on the research performed by G.B. Gutner and Ch. Taylor and their detailed analysis of the turning stages of human civilization, is given.
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 | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".