Dinosaurs and Exile: Reflections on Colonial Logics and Liberation Theologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the potential danger of reproducing colonial logics in recent liberation theological articulations. I have divided the article into three parts to examine the works of two theologians. In the first part, I analyze the concept of the “organization of the absurd” developed by Brazilian theologian Rubem Alves, who argued that contemporary society is organized around symbiotic power relations that aim to solve all human problems through increased power and force. He compares modern society to dinosaurs to highlight the fundamental issues in social organization and suggests that theological reflection needs to delink from this governing logic. For this, Alves suggests using imagination, dreams, magic, and creativity to rethink contemporary theological articulations. In the second part, I delve into the critical analysis of Puerto Rican theologian Luis Rivera Pagán, who critiques the almost exclusive use of the Exodus experience for liberation, arguing that it leads to replicating colonial mechanisms of oppression and conquest. From his Puerto Rican colonized context, he suggests that the painful experience of exile is a theological key for rethinking justice and liberation. In the third part, I propose that Alves and Rivera Pagán's theological reflections mirror decolonial insights long before contemporary decolonial discuourses. I contend that while both authors distance themselves from normative knowledge patterns to rethink theological thought from an alternative framework, echoing, in a way, decolonial thinking, their contributions—and those of many Latin American liberation theologians—are continuously overlooked and unacknowledged in many decolonial analyses. My goal with this article is to provide a profound exploration of Alves and Rivera Pagán's theological methods to avoid the trap of repackaging colonial mechanisms under the guise of liberation theological reflections.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".