MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W776178185 · doi:10.51644/erlo6410

Theologies in dialogue: the place of religion in the 21st century university

2006· article· en· W776178185 on OpenAlex
Sally Vance-Trembath

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueConsensus · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Education and Schools
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyEpistemologyAestheticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

summarizes the Cardinal's understanding of the university this way: "The object of a university education is to produce thinking people, no more and no less." 1 As a person of faith, Newman would have presupposed that one of the things one ought to be able to think clearly about is religion, its practice and the truth claims it makes about reality.An over-aching stipulation of any discussion of "Faith, Freedom and the Academy" that intends to celebrate and build upon Newman's important text is that Newman would expect a university to produce people who know how to think critically about religion.There are two points I would like to make regarding the legacy of Newmans' Idea of the University for our universities today.The first is a description of Religious Studies as a discipline in search of a methodology; I shall describe how I think we got here.My second point is to propose a different approach for Religious Studies departments.I suggest that we use the methodology of theological reflection, that is, critical reflection upon faith, in our Religious Studies Departments.The reason for this is that many Religious Studies departments have moved towards models and methods that belong to the intellectual family of the Social Sciences.I believe we would do well to return explicitly to the humanities branch of the University.We made the shift to the Social Science models in the interest of objectivity, because we feared we would ignore the softer, or even previously silenced voices in religious discourse.This shift brought with it problems that have overwhelmed its more positive effects.I am convinced that we can return to an explicitly theological methodology without privileging one voice.Theology, which used to be the center of gravity for the university's purpose, at least when the university was invented, has been either relegated to the fringes of the academic disciplines or in 95

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it