Preface to Islamic Political Psychology: Siyasah Syariyyah Meets Psychology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to decribe what is Islamic political psychology. The coverage of this paper is preliminary in nature. The study of political psychology came into picture as a discipline of study quite recently. It is a combination of political science and psychology. It is timely to have the study of Islamic Political psychology. If the study of political psychology involves the theories and practice of political science and psychology, necessarily the Islamic political psychology involves the theories and practice of Islamic Politics (siyasah syariyyah) and Islamic psychology (‘ilm nafs al-Islami). This paper intends to look at the principles of Islamic politics and its relationship to Islamic psychology. It will also be describing the characteristic features of politics from the perspective of syariah. The principles that underline the political system of Islam will then be elaborated. This paper will attempt to highlight the similarities and differences between political psychology as perceived by the coventional perspective and the study as expounded by the worldview of Islam. Islamic political psychology will help the understanding of a certain pattern of thinkings and behaviours either of the politicians or the people as they relate to politics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".