MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327914323 · doi:10.1558/rst.21267

“Myths to Die By?”

2023· article· en· W4327914323 on OpenAlexaff
John Dadosky

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicViolence, Religion, and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPejorativeMythologyHermeneuticsPhilosophyEpistemologyScapegoatSociologyTheologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article critically engages René Girard’s approach to myth by reference to the Diné (Navajo) creation story (Diné bahane’). According to Girard all myths conceal real events of violence that have been concealed during the centuries of their recounting. Closer analysis reveals that Girard’s approach is one-sidedly pejorative in his hermeneutics of myth. By contrast, the Diné hold their creation story to be a sacred account of their origins and as such it is foundational to their traditional way of life. Prima facie, while certain themes in their sacred story may seem to corroborate Girard’s hermeneutics of myth, a closer examination of the anomalies raises critical questions about Girard’s assumptions, especially with respect to aboriginal creation stories and reveals a further need to clarify the legitimate place for positive and pejorative approaches to myth.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicViolence, Religion, and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207