Animal-selves in Inuit Dream-cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic shamanism can be regarded as a specialised dream-culture, providing a framework wherein certain individuals could gain mastery by internalising the collective mythological system and aligning that with their own capacity to dream. The forms of animals are central in this phenomenon. Shamanic activity traditionally focussed on actual hunting processes (location of game, enforcement of ritual and other rules governing the taking of game). They managed this work by communicating with animal spirits (among others). A life-threatening encounter with a charismatic animal predator was a standard path into shamanism. And shamans wielded their power through semi-autonomous animal-avatars — as lovers, companions or servants — contacted through dreams, visions or second-sight.Inuit animal dreams make an interesting case-study, due to the remarkable time-depth of their recorded dreams and visions (late 18C — present). The Inuit, like many tribal peoples, slept and dreamt together. They shared sleeping habits, customs of dream-sharing, beliefs about the relationship between dream-events and everyday life; they evolved a sophisticated taxonomy of dream-types. All this helped sustain the profile and reception of “culture-dreams” involving animals; animal encounters as gateways to initiation, animal-avatars in dreams generally. As their relations with modernity changed, so did their dream-relations with animals.This paper outlines some of these trajectories, drawing on texts and visual materials from different time periods. The situation of animals in Inuit dream-cultures mirrors changes in subsistence and education. Modernisation, externally imposed or internalised, entailed the suppression/rejection of indigenous traditions; followed, in the later 20C, by revaluations and attempts at renewal. Relevant also is the impact of Christian missions; most recently Pentecostalists, whose spirit traditions identify non-human dream-creatures as devils. Key cultural patterns concerning animal-avatars remain, but the experience comes to be framed differently; in terms of individual(ist) psychology, as nightmare, retarditaire delusion or madness.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".