Pluralizing Religion: Islamic Law and the Anxiety of Reasoned Deliberation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
For the liberally minded, religion is something that inheres in people, rather than an arena for reasoned deliberation. This essentialization arises in part from how an uncritical embrace of liberal tolerance as value-neutral covers the way in which liberal governance essentializes religion, and thereby marginalizes it from general debate. For Wendy Brown, who writes in a context of a liberal theory of governance, the conception of “the religious” in a discourse of tolerance is reductive, and will often blind others from understanding how members of a faith community understand both their God and their world through a thick, rational vocabulary founded upon religious traditions that either speak directly or are made to speak to issues affecting the public weal. It can and has contributed to a climate in which the religious is deemed to have little or no place in public debate and discourse, on either principled or pragmatic grounds (Brown, 4, 10, 24). Those with a religious framework may not view their religious system as purely subjective, private and individual. Rather, they may rely upon it as a lens through which to view and understand their world. As such, to problematize liberal discourses of tolerance and religion will require us, in part, to understand how religious traditions such as Islamic law were not rarefied traditions, but instead offered a framework for understanding, characterizing, and ultimately ordering the world. But accepting Brown’s critique can have anxiety-producing implications for the religiously minded who might not want to contend with the indeterminacy that comes with rendering religion a site of reasoned deliberation. Those with a religious framework may want their framework to be so determinate as to be outside the bounds of reasoned deliberation. Indeed, Roxanne Euben suggests that for Islamic fundamentalists, having a uniform set of guidelines aids in cementing an Islamic identity positioned against a hegemonic liberal West. Thereby, to undermine the rarified image of a religious tradition such as Islamic law may pose a threat to both liberals and Islamists whose agendas of governance and community identity benefit from the rarification of a tradition such as Islamic law.Nonetheless, the fact remains that Islamic legal history is replete with theoretical inquiries into the nature of knowledge, the scope of moral agency and legal interpretation, and the authority of law. These inquiries are perhaps a product of the anxiety that comes with recognizing a religious tradition as a site of reasoned deliberation. This article provides a brief account of how premodern Muslim jurists theorized about the inevitable interpretivism in the juridical enterprise. The way in which they gave license to jurists to reason to conclusions of law raised fundamental questions of theology, moral agency, and legal authority.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,030 | 0,029 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,015 | 0,125 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,016 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,011 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,011 | 0,021 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».