Bibliographic record
Abstract
While discursive approaches and social theory enjoy some notoriety in the academic study of religion, the so-called critical turn is no stranger to challenges. Some reject it as philosophically apolitical; others, as ignorant of biological and psychological insights. In this edition of The Interview, we turn to an exchange with MIT Professor Emeritus Noam Chomsky, whose work has informed how many scholars of religion approach the sciences and cultural politics. Chomsky sat with retired Canadian Broadcasting Corporation broadcaster and Continuing Senior Fellow of Massey College at the University of Toronto, Ian Alexander, and Chair of the Department of Linguistics at the University of Victoria, Martha McGinnis, as part of the John Albert Hall Lectures’ Values for a New World series at the University of Victoria’s Centre for Studies in Religion and Society. We’ve excerpted this rich exchange from a longer two-part interview which we encourage you to access on the CSRS’s YouTube channel: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1AZa5z85YY&t=4054s and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDP71Q2-T3s&t=1s).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".