[Review of] <em>Eastern Learning and the Heavenly Way: The Tonghak and Ch'ondogyo Movements and the Twilight of Korean Independence</em>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young's book is an excellent example of balance.On the one hand, Young (history, Univ. of Western Ontario) details the internal challenges and changes within the nativist Tonghak and Ch'ondogyo religious movements, from 1894 to 1910, and their role in the Korean independence struggles up to Japan's annexation of Korea.Of particular interest to scholars will be Young's fresh interpretations of the followers of Tonghak and Ch'ondogyo, namely, how people involved in those groups did not simply act in unison to further Korean independence.On the other hand, Young provides an engaging account of how those histories tie into broader events and intellectual trends in East Asia.For example, Ch'ondogyo, a reformed version of Tonghak that deemphasized the folk practices that were considered superstitious, adopted new ideas of "civilization and enlightenment" learned during its founder's time in Japan, while still retaining concepts from Chinese philosophy.This book will interest historians as well as those who study religions and how they addressed social, intellectual, and political developments during late-19th and early-20th-century modernity.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".