Sacred as Secular: Secularization under Theocracy in Iran, by ABDOLMOHAMMAD KAZEMIPUR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Sacred as Secular, Abdolmohammad Kazemipur draws from empirical sociological research on national social attitudes in Iran over the past 40 years to contend that, despite the ideological goals of the Islamic Republic, post-1979 Iran is undergoing secularization across the spheres of the state, the streets, and political philosophy. In doing so, Kazemipur not only challenges conventional wisdom on the Islamic Revolution, but also theories of Muslim exceptionalism, which preemptively exclude Muslims from debates about secularization. What, Kazemipur asks, is “the experience of secularity in the Muslim world”? (18). Theoretically wide-ranging, Kazemipur’s book requires a nuanced understanding of new theories of secularization in an era of religious revival, which he dutifully provides in the first two chapters. Key terms are addressed and analyzed such as secularization (a sociological phenomenon) and secularism (a political ideology). Then, calling forth scholars like Charles Taylor, José Casanova, and David Yamane, Kazemipur complicates secularization theory’s strict divide between the sacred and the secular, as well as the conventional assumption that secularization processes must include a consistent and multi-fronted fading of religiosity. In particular, he contemplates how societies can simultaneously become more secular due to a reduced scope of religion, yet “more religious due to a stronger attachment to that reduced scope” (30). This is an adaptation of Charles Taylor’s “scope-reduced religiosity” or “secularity 3” (34) that allows not only for the sacred to be arrived at through a secular process, but for a sacred process to move to a secular political philosophy (30).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".