Beberapa Isu Teologi dan Syari’ah dalam Perspektif Islam dan Agama Samawi Lainnya: Studi Kasus Pemikiran M. Quraish Shihab
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses the comparison of Islamic perspective and other religious perspectives regarding some theological and sharia issues, taking Quraish Shihab’s thought as a case in point. Using a descriptive-analytic method, this study answers how his thoughts about some issues of theology and shari’a are similar with or different from other religious perspectives. This article finds that the theological and sharia themes that are carried by M. Quraish Shihab are related to texts such as in other religions, especially through the theme of unifying God, respecting for others, establishing prayer, prohibition of killing and doing heinous, qishāsh law, fasting, spirituality, and alms. Intertextual thinking is useful for bringing together interfaith themes that emphasize the unity of sources and the close relation of religions to one another.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it