Pancasila Philosophy as a Basis for Strengthening Religious Moderation in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of religious fanaticism that is not in accordance with the constitution and state ideology is certainly very dangerous. The current government has promoted a program to strengthen religious moderation as a strategic step taken. However, the source of strengthening religious moderation is considered still minimal to bring up Pancasila as a basic value as well as the philosophy of the Indonesian nation. Whereas Pancasila is a guideline for the life of the Indonesian nation that shapes the character and character and personality of the nation. The purpose of this research is to present the values of Pancasila as the basis for strengthening religious moderation in Indonesia. This qualitative research method is a literature study using a philosophical normative approach. This literature research optimizes references about Pancasila and strengthening religious moderation in Indonesia. The results of the research present Pancasila which is very rich in values that are a source in strengthening religious moderation. Key values in religious moderation are found to be very diverse and very rich in the formulation of Pancasila. The power of Pancasila as a source of strengthening religious moderation can strengthen and strengthen Indonesian society in moderate religion.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".