KOREAŃSKI SZAMANIZM – RELIGIA KOBIET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shamanism is one of the oldest religions that have existed around the world. But Korean shamanism is very exceptionally in the world, because it is monopolized by women. This article focuses on the main reasons for that state of affairs. Korean shamanism has never been accepted by the ruling class as an official religion. It was not supported by the elites of the society, so it has functioned only at the margin of culture and society. Confucian-patriarchy in the Joseon dynasty (1392-1897) was one of the main reasons why Korean shamanism became the religion of women. According to Confucian ideology there must be sexual segregation in the household, and it was extended even to ritual performances for the gods. Men satisfied their religious needs through Confucianism, but they completely excluded women from it. As women were excluded from Confucian ceremonies they needed to find a religion for themselves. The gods worshiped in shamanism and the shamanistic ritual itself were treated by the ruling class as coarse and vulgar, suitable only for people of lower classes and women. The gods in Korean shamanism are not providing people with noble ideals or dreams, they just support human beings by protecting them against bad luck and bringing them good luck. A Korean shamanistic ritual consists mainly of dances and singing. Shamans communicate with their gods in a trance induced by dancing vigorously. In the Joseon dynasty dominated by Confucian ideology it was very unsuitable for men.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".