Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book looks at the concept of tradition in the study of religion. It examines the history of the concept, uses in the discipline, theoretical perspectives (including Indigenous and post/decolonial studies, cognitive science and hermeneutics), and critical perspectives on key thinkers (Halbwachs, Gadamer, Ricoeur, J & A Assmann, Boyer, Morin) and recommendations for clearing the air of a key theoretical tension surrounding the concept of the invention of tradition. Questioning the use of ‘tradition’ as a synonym for ‘religion,’ the book models a relational and ideology-critical approach to complex concepts. It engages with important theoretical issues, including opposition to ‘modernity,’ Indigenous ‘self-conscious traditionalism.’ colonial discourses, intersections with ritual, agency and reason and ‘the invention of tradition.’ Discussions – with examples from a variety of religions and cultures – including African, Indigenous North American, south Pacific, Afro-Brazilian, Japanese, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu and esoteric. Four case studies – on esoteric Traditionalism, Candomblé, great/little traditions and Indigenous traditions in Canadian law – engage central ideas in greater detail.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it