MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389075331 · doi:10.53111/ea.v58i3.1111

Conversion and Cow Protection in India: Analysis and Critique of Hindutva Politics

2023· article· en· W4389075331 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Pandimakil G.

Bibliographic record

VenueEstudio Agustiniano · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian History and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsSaint Paul University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHindutvaSecularismHinduismPoliticsPolitical economyDemocracyPolitical scienceNationalismConstitutionSociologyPluralism (philosophy)LawReligious studiesEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2014, India has been under the rule of BJP which progressively introduced various Hindutva agenda to usurp social dominance and undermine the minorities, especially Muslims and Christians. This essay concentrates on two issues namely conversion and cow protection which were passionately discussed during the colonial period but resurfaced post-independence thanks to VHP. The new emphasis given on these old topics clearly betray Hindu nationalist pattern of thought and action embraced by the current government. Instead of fomenting unity, strengthening the shared culture, this option by the Sanghparivar undermines social solidarity and risks civil conflict. To what extent and how Hindutva argumentation deviates from traditional/Gandhian Hindu conceptions and innovates on commonly shared Indic values are analyzed in this paper. It manifests the potential danger of denouncing constitutional secularism and democracy as well as religious freedom guaranteed in the constitution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.028
Scholarly communication0.0110.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 venueEstudio AgustinianoSame topicIndian History and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207