MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782483145 · doi:10.19105/al-lhkam.v7i1.319

ORIENTASI PEMIKIRAN ULAMA’ NU (Jender dalam Perspektif Ulama Skriptualis dan Subtansialis di NU Cabang Sumenep)

2013· article· id· W2782483145 on OpenAlexaff
Moh Jazuli

Bibliographic record

VenueAL-IHKAM Jurnal Hukum & Pranata Sosial · 2013
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQur’anic Interpretation Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesTheologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semenjak akhir abad ke 18 atau awal abad ke -19 Masehi telahtumbuh perjumpaan intensif antara dunia Islam dan duniaBarat. Pada periode ini, kaum Muslim harus menghadapipilihan yang sangat dilematis, antara keinginan untukmenjunjung tinggi nilai-nilai ajaran Islam dengan kebutuhanmengikuti gagasan-gagasan modern. Ini kemudianmelahirkan corak pemikiran skriptualis dan substansialis.Melalui topik jender, kedua corak pemikiran ini juga terjadi dikalangan ulama’ NU Cabang Sumenep. Secara ideologis,keduanya berbeda karena metode pemaknaan merekaterhadap teks ajaran Islam juga berbeda. Sedangkan secarasosiologis, keduanya berbeda dalam memandang fenomenasosial yang berkembang. Dalam hal jender, ulama’ skriptualisberpegang teguh kepada ketidakbolehan perempuan menjadipemimpin berdasarkan atas ayat al-Qur’ân dan Hadîts.Sedangkan kalangan ulama’ substansialis meneguhkankebolehan perempuan untuk memegang jabatan publik. Inididasarkan atas pemaknaan substansial terhadap al-Qur’ânsurat al-Nisâ’: 34 dan hadîts Nabi.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAL-IHKAM Jurnal Hukum & Pranata SosialSame topicQur’anic Interpretation StudiesFrench-language works237,207