MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2235407870 · doi:10.17120/omuifd.82065

Kutsal Kitab Olarak Kur’an: Çağdaş Bir Hıristiyan Değerlenirmesi (Wilfred Cantwell Smith Örneği

2001· article· tr· W2235407870 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mahmut Aydın

Bibliographic record

VenueDergiPark (Istanbul University) · 2001
Typearticle
Languagetr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamPhilosophyTheologyHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Qur’an which is the centre of Muslim faith and religious experience had been perceived by Christians as the product of the events of the life of the Prophet Muhammad in response particular needs of his own community and not God’s revelation to him. But, after the second half of the twentieth century, this negative and prejudiced attitude towards the Qur’an started to leave its place to a more positive and scholarly understanding. There are two significant reasons if this change: (1) The increasing number of scholarly and comprehensive studies on Islam, and specifically on the Qur’an in the light of new scientific developments. (2) The Increasing Muslim presence among Christians in Europe and United States of America from the 1960’s. In addition to these developments, in the area of the comparative study of religions has been indicated that a sacred text (book) is sacred for those who regards it divine, keeps it with respect and considers it normative for their religious beliefs and practices. In this article, we have examined the views of Canadian History of Religions W. Cantwell Smith who evaluate the status of the Qur’an according to this principles. Smith rejects the Western studies on the Qur’an up to his time by considering them as deficient and prejudiced. Since, according to him non of the statements of the Western student of the Qur’an is not right unless it is accepted by Muslims as true. By taking this principe into account, Smith is not interested in searching for the authenticity of the Qur’an by applying the modern scientific methods to it. Instead, in the light of the phenomenologicl approach, he gives priority to what Muslims say about the Qur’an and how the Qur’an serves them as the Word of God by contributing to shape and to develop the Muslims civilisation. By doing this, unlike many other Christians student of the Qur’an, he regards the status of the Qur’an as the Word of God for Muslims. After arriving this conclusion, Smith calls those who want to study the Qur’an do this in the light of phenomenological approach by acknowledging it as the Word of God for Muslims. Then, he argues that to do justice to the nature of the Qur’an it would be better to avoid using modern scientific methods which have been applied to the Bible in the Wester academies in the last three hundred years. To defend the necessity of the phenomenological approach to the Qur’an, the leading Muslim scholar Hasan Askari stresses that unlike the other approaches it starts with the conviction that there are phenomena, strictly religious, which cannot be reduced or turned into merely social, economic and psychological paradigms. As a conclusion, Smith’s stress on the meaning of the Qur’an in the heart of its followers rather than in the literary significance of its text can lead both Christians and Muslims to understand its value more positively. For, in our religiously pluralistic age, if the take into account the conveying message of each other’s scripture, the Qur’an and the Bible, rather than its text, we can study that scripture more positively in the light of our own circumstances and observe its contribution to its followers lives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDergiPark (Istanbul University)Same topicHistorical and Linguistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207