Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abdessalam Yassine, a Moroccan Qur’anic scholar, passionately arguesthat Muslims need to return to the Qur’anic revelation and the propheticmethod of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in order to resurrect the Muslimmind and worldview, which are currently subjugated to secular westernthought. According to Yassine, the book’s purpose “is the establishmentand reminding of the Prophetic Method” (p. 25). This argument is madein the format of an introduction and 37 subject variants (ranging in lengthfrom a few paragraphs to seven pages).Yassine juxtaposes the Muslim mind with that of the secular materialisticwestern mind, where the latter is shown to be deficient while theformer, based on and nourished by revelation and the Sunnah, is consideredto be truly emancipatory. He states: “When discussing the choicebetween two minds and two mentalities we have only two options: Eitherthe sovereignty of the Revelation, pure and simple … Or the sovereignty of the arena, which occupied the other mind with its materialism, racialismand vagueness of its goals” (p. 9).Throughout the book, Yassine provides some insights into Islamicspiritual practice and critiques mainstream western thought. Interestingly,his essay “Ritual Purity” eloquently points out the importance of situatingthe body in Islamic spirituality and how its purification is interconnectedwith inner spiritual growth. In addition, he does not romanticizethe current Muslim ummah and shift all blame to the West; rather, he critiquesthe ummah for being coopted by western materialism.However, I had numerous problems with this book, beginning with itspremise. In an age of pluralistic societies, it is very hard to digest a discussionwhere one does not acknowledge that a pure “western mind” or a“Muslim mind” does not exist, because this assumption fails to acknowledgethe difference and diversity among interpretations of text and ideas.Yassine employs the dominant discourses in both western and Islamicthought in order to forward his argument, which, in turn, leads to essentialism.Knowledge production is dynamic, and constructing such a binaryframework perpetuates the idea that knowledge is static and fixed to a certaincontext, which only bolsters stereotypes ...
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".