Jerarquías, familia y formas de participación en la Organización Sai Baba de Argentina. Un análisis sobre los límites del campo New Age.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En sintonía con problematizaciones recientes, este artículo cuestiona la tendencia a incluir dentro de la New Age a manifestaciones religiosas que si bien presentan similitudes, reales o aparentes, con aquella, pasa por alto diferencias significativas que no escapan a un análisis más sistemático. En este trabajo nos focalizamos en los rasgos más disonantes con el circuito New Age que presenta una de dichas expresiones religiosas, el movimiento Sai Baba. Así, en primer lugar, ofrecemos una caracterización de la estructura institucional de la Organización Sai Baba, el tipo de autoridad que en ella impera y el rol otorgado a la familia. A continuación, brindamos una tipología de las personas que en Argentina participan del movimiento Sai Baba. Posteriormente, damos cuenta de las características fundamentales del movimiento New Age. Finalmente, contrastando elementos de uno y otro concluimos que, si bien existen puntos de contacto, existen asimismo importantes diferencias entre el culto Sai y la New Age.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".