Діалог культур як основа сучасного мультикультурного cоціуму в умовах культурної глобалізації
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the origins of multiculturalism and changes in the understanding of its essence. The concept of multiculturalism, its main characteristics and features are analyzed. The problematic field of multiculturalism is defined: ideas about the cultural involvement of people, the inevitability of cultural diversity, pluralism and intercultural dialogue. It is proved that even in the early development stages, the meaning of "multiculturalism" was quite inconsistent. In the political sphere, the term multiculturalism has been used since the late 60s of the twentieth century in connection with the development of the movement for the human rights expansion, as well as with the intensification of migration flows, which led to an increase in the cultural diversity of host countries. The practical implementation of multiculturalism as an integration policy took place in the 1970s in Canada, Australia, and the United States, in particular through criticism of assimilation policies. The common factors that facilitate or hinder the implementation of multiculturalism are examined. The ethno-cultural context of Ukraine's development is highlighted. Since Ukraine gained independence, representatives of national minorities and ethnic communities have been able to unite in various national and cultural societies that allow representatives of national minorities to be involved in the social and cultural life of the country. It is confirmed that the life of ethnic communities largely depends on the initiative of the communities themselves, on the activity of their cultural, educational and artistic institutions, holding art events, national culture festivals, book publishing, distribution of media in their native language, etc. Multiculturalism and intercultural dialogue should become a strategy for Ukraine. This will contribute to the further democratization of society, European integration and Ukraine's entry into the world community.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.015 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".