MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121325436 · doi:10.1558/rsth.v29i1.93

Toward Global Community: Sufism and World Order

2010· article· en· W2121325436 on OpenAlexaff
Abdul Aziz Said, Nathan C. Funk

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSufismEnvironmental ethicsVisionContemplationDialecticSolidarityContext (archaeology)SociologySpiritualityHuman rightsPoliticsPolitical scienceEpistemologyLawIslamHistoryPhilosophyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The failure of “universal secular visions” to bridge global material and cultural divides as well as stem widespread ecological damage has precipitated the need to draw upon the untapped spiritual resources and enduring wisdom of the world’s great contemplative traditions. Drawing from the essential precepts and doctrines of Sufism, this article presents a response to the challenges presented by contemporary world politics and global disorder. It calls for a consensus-based and cooperative approach to global issues based on eight principles stemming from Sufi tradition; principles that could contribute to the foundation of a new world order. Sufism’s vision of tawhid, inner freedom, spiritual elevation, and human wholeness can provide a compelling basis for responding to contemporary challenges of a materialist global life. Furthermore, its capacity to inspire human solidarity and deeply ecumenical spirituality can greatly expedite the emergence of a global peace culture. However, translating the principles of Sufism into practice within the context of the present world order requires effort to advance four interrelated processes of change: promoting a global system of checks and balances, strengthening global civil society, promoting human rights and cultural diversity, and developing a broad consensus of peoples and governments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.033
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207