MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967298980 · doi:10.1163/157006607x166573

The Virus and the Scriptures: Muslims and AIDS in Tanzania

2007· article· en· W1967298980 on OpenAlexaff
Felicitas Becker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion in Africa · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistrustMainstreamContext (archaeology)SociologyState (computer science)ClosenessSkepticismSubject (documents)Gender studiesPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawEpistemologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines Tanzanian Muslims' practical and discursive stances on AIDS in relation to the context in which they are produced. The AIDS problematic is interacting with lively debates, as for the last two decades Muslim reformists have been demanding revisions to ritual practice and a more restrictive application of Muslim social norms. The state-sponsored central organisation for Tanzanian Muslims is viewed with distrust not only by reformist, but also many 'mainstream' Muslims, and there is no organisation to provide an inclusive forum for debate. Official AIDS education programmes reached provincial Muslims before the epidemic had become acute, and were initially greeted with the same formulaic, passive acceptance as many other state initiatives. Since AIDS deaths have become more frequent, recommendations for prevention have become the subject of intense debate. Understanding of the epidemic draws on local religious notions as well as Muslim teachings, and invariably focuses on ways of life rather than questions of health narrowly conceived. It indicates increasing scepticism regarding the ability of either local society or the state to achieve 'development' and wariness of the perceived closeness of science to authority. On the other hand, Muslim observers have found ways to relate scientific descriptions of the epidemic to the Qur'an and to accept the epidemic as God's will, without thereby abdicating responsibility for trying to contain it. Ultimately, individuals are on their own in formulating their understanding of the epidemic. There is no clear correlation between reformist sympathies and the acceptance or otherwise of official recommendations, as many other factors, including age, education and personal experience, influence individual stances.

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 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)0.006
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion in AfricaSame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207