Le prosélytisme dans le contexte de la laïcité et de la sécularisation au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past 20 years, Western societies have undergone profound transformations, among other things, due to immigration. These transformations are characterized by an increasing diversity and the impact of a multitude of traditions and religious beliefs. The proliferation of religious traditions and their expression often poses a real challenge, bringing the question of the place of religion in the public space and, consequently, making proselytism and its regulation at the heart of concerns. In certain European societies, considered modern and secularized, such as France, governments are inclined to ensure a certain social cohesion and assert secularism. This is also the case in Quebec, as in June 2019, the law of secularism was adopted. This law, among other things, attests to the neutrality and separation of the state and religion. However, sometimes, some individuals go beyond these principles, viewing secularism as a means to eliminate any traces of religious beliefs in the public space. For some, it could even be a tool to limit the proselytism of religious groups. Based on a few interviews, this research examines the experience of proselytism as lived by evangelical Protestant believers in Montreal. Does the Quebec context generate notable resistances to this religious practice protected by the law?
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".