On the Etiology of Homosexuality: Theological Considerations
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 thesis provides a historical and holistic overview of the etiology of homosexuality from the nineteenth century with the emergence of the scientific study of sex and the birth of sexual modernism up until the present. Today, the scientific literature leans heavily toward a biological explanation, while still taking into consideration environmental and cultural factors. Furthermore, this thesis offers a multi-variant definition of homosexuality primarily based on Camille Paglia’s definition of homosexuality as an adaptation. This thesis also aligns itself with the work of Ritch Savin-Williams who puts forth a fluid, continuum-based model of sexuality as opposed to Michael Bailey’s categorical model. Furthermore, I explore how Canadian philosopher and theologian Bernard Lonergan’s notions of openness, conversion and authenticity shed light on the continual need for self-questioning and self-knowledge; scientific data suggests that sexual orientation is not immutable and can change, but authenticity in turn requires that the human person be open, attentive and receptive to such current and future possibilities. Lastly, my manuscript’s intended purpose is to offer a fair and realistic understanding of homosexuality that involves taking note of the advantages and shortcomings of homosexuality. Crucial questions raised by my research include: What is the etiology of homosexuality? What is the cultural, philosophical and theological significance of homosexuality? What role do critical thinking and self-knowledge play in sexual ethics? Is it sensical to speak of the human person in terms of a binary of ‘straight/gay’ when much of the scientific literature points to a fluid continuum of sexual desire?
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 it