MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2237868791 · doi:10.82308/617

Isma'il al-Faruqi (1921-1986) and inter-faith dialogue: the man, the scholar, the participant

2009· article· en· W2237868791 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Charles Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Academy of Sciences of BelarusCairo UniversityIndian Council of Medical ResearchNorris Cotton Cancer CenterMcGill University
KeywordsDialogical selfFaithNarrativeSociologyContext (archaeology)Identity (music)IslamGender studiesReligious studiesEpistemologyTheologyAestheticsHistoryPhilosophyLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the contemporary period of Muslim-Christian dialogue and inter-faith study, there are only a few Western-trained Muslim scholars who are recognised for their study of other faiths and for their contributions to inter-faith dialogue. One such scholar was Ismaʿil al-Faruqi (1921-1986). Throughout his academic career he taught, published and was actively engaged in inter-faith study and dialogue. In the 1960s and 1970s, he was one of the main Western Muslim representatives in dialogue with the Vatican, the World Council of Churches and other Christian organisations. He and his wife were murdered in 1986. This study critically examines al-Faruqi's methodology of engagement with non-Muslims, its practical applications, and explores the reasons why he spent a lifetime involved in religious dialogue. In Part One, his life is presented as a biographical narrative and analysed using identity theory to ascertain some of the reasons and motivations for his lifelong commitment to dialogue and inter-faith study. Part Two introduces various methodologies for the study of religion that were available to him and then al-Faruqi is placed within the context of the history of Muslim-non-Muslim encounter. In Part Three, the development of his methodology is presented through his voice by documenting the stages of his thought as seen in his writings. His three-fold methodology of comparative study, meta-religious principles and dialogical applications are examined not only as theory but also in terms of their applications. It is in the application process that one can see the adjustments and contextual uses of the methods that he developed, such as his insistence upon ethics as a means

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207