Bibliographic record
Abstract
The international Islamabad conference titled God, Life and Cosmos:Theistic Perspectives was held in Islamabad, November 6-9, 2000.Sponsored and organized by the Center for Theology and Natural Sciences(CTNS), Berkeley, United States, Islamic Research Institute (IRI),Islamabad, Pakistan, and International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT),Islamabad, Pakistan, the conference drew over fifty scholars from the fieldsof natural sciences and religious studies. A number of interesting paperswere presented on various aspects of the relation between religion and science,and each paper was critically evaluated and responded to by a respondent.The conference commenced with the introductory remarks of MuzaffarIqbal (National Library, Alberta, Canada) and then the keynote speechwhich was delivered by William Chittick, the renowned scholar of Islamicintellectual history and Ibn Arabi. Chittick’s keynote address titled“Modem Science and the Eclipse of Tawhid” focused on the sharp contrastbetween the Islamic concept of tuwhid (Divine unity) and the secularworldview of modem science. Drawing on the traditional distinctionbetween the transmitted (naqli) and intellectual (uqli) sciences, Chittickemphasized the importance of intellectual sciences in confronting the challengesof the modem world. As respondent to Chittick‘s keynote paper,Hasan al-Shafi’i (President of the International Islamic University,Islamabad, Pakistan) further elaborated on the points raised by the keynotespeaker. The f i t day of the conference closed with a wonderful presentationabout Pakistan and its history by the son and daughter of MuzaffarIqbal, the indefitagiable convener of the conference.The papers presented at the conference touched upon nearly all of themajor aspects of the religion-science relationship: the rise of modem physicalsciences and the responses of the Islamic as well as Christian worlds,philosophy of science, modem cosmology, theory of evolution and itsmeaning for the religious worldview, history of Islamic sciences and its ...
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".