MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6993109973

Native American spirituality : its appropriation and incorporation amongst native and non-native peoples

2007· other· en· W6993109973 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · 2007
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNative americanIndigenousCommodificationNative American studiesAppropriationSpirituality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis focuses primarily on Lakota concerns about the appropriation of their spirituality. The religious authority of the Lakota has been recognised by Native Americans and non- Natives alike through the books of Nicholas Black Elk, who witnessed the establishment of reservations in the Plains, the aftermath of the Wounded Knee massacre and the conversion of his people to Christianity, and through the teachings of his nephew Frank Fools Crow who kept the prohibited Lakota Sun Dance alive and other ceremonial practices until the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) was passed by Congress in 1978. Not long after, elders from Lakota and other Plains Indian Nations became increasingly concerned about what they perceived to be the misuse of their ceremonies. In 1993, five hundred representatives of the Lakota, Nakota and Dakota peoples endorsed the ‘Declaration of War Against Exploiters of Lakota Spirituality’, which primarily attacks the commodification of Lakota ceremonies by ‘pseudo-Indian charlatans’ and ‘new age wannabes’. Ten years later, a group of Lakota and neighbouring Plains Indian spiritual leaders supported the ‘Arvol Looking Horse Proclamation’ prohibiting all non-Native participation in Plains Indian ceremonies. Meanwhile, in academic institutions, several Native American scholars accused their non-Native colleagues of exploiting Native American communities, raising methodological questions connected to insider/outsider debates and research ethics in the study of Native American religious traditions. The thesis first examines the historical roots of the religious ‘war’ between Native Americans and non-Natives and analyses how the expropriation of Lakota ceremonies across tribal boundaries became the basis of a pan-Indian religion. By bringing together diverse indigenous peoples of North America as the ‘colonised’ against non-Native appropriators perceived as the ‘colonisers’, a tension developed between racial interpretations of ‘Native American’ based on blood quantum methods, established by the federal governments, and ‘traditional’ definitions where attitude and behaviour determines membership of the group. The main body of the thesis explores this tension in a variety of contexts: among the Lakota themselves, non-Native Americans accused of appropriating Lakota ceremonies, contemporary Mi’kmaq in eastern Canada who have employed Lakota and other Plains Indian ceremonial practices, and in the academy where ethnicity and ethics in the study of Native American religions are currently debated. The matter is further complicated by evidence illustrating that the Lakota have no centralised authority where traditional religious matters are concerned; however, Native Americans consistently refer to ‘protocols’ that define the way ceremonies are performed and the rules of participation, largely based on the Lakota model again, in particular where pan-Indian religion is present, such as at Mi’kmaq powwows, and in ceremonies where the pipe is smoked, such as the sweat lodge ceremony and vision quest, which have been appropriated extensively, often without the protocols, by non-Native Americans, including practitioners in Britain where some have altered the ceremonies to create a reconstituted British indigenous tradition. The attempt to restrict participation in Native American ceremonies according to ethnicity has not only created conflict between Native and non-Native peoples, but within Native communities as well. Nevertheless, the call for exclusivity has come after previous warnings about the misuse of ceremonies had been ignored. Therefore, the thesis examines Native American discourses about the breaking of ‘protocols’ as being at the heart of objections to the appropriation of Native American spirituality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique)Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207