Revelation is a Symbol: Anti-Radicalism of Pluri-Religious Communities According to Jaspers in the Context of Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article aims to explore and discuss the anti-radicalism of pluri-religious communities in the context of Indonesia. The study is motivated by the high phenomenon of religious radicalism in the last two decades (2000-2020). Religious radicalism is rooted in the understanding of literal revelations recorded in the sacred document. The problem is focused on the erosion of radical ideology targeting the source, namely the language of revelation. The study was carried out qualitative with philosophical hermeneutical approaches that are used to analyze the problem. Data were pooled from journal articles, research, official government reports, print media, and the internet. The theoretical reference used is Jaspers’ relational existentialism. The study found that the language of revelation is not the absolute truth nor the original voice of transcendence, but rather the chiffer who has the role of echoing transcendence. Radicalism is a reflection of narrow and shallow fanaticism, a single truth-based belief over literary revelation. The study concludes that the fundamental anti-radicalism movement in pluri-religious societies is the transposition from literal revelation to symbolic revelation. Novelty studies that the metaphysical-figurative interpretation of literal revelation is necessary to ward off the threat of radicalism.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".