<i>God, Science, and Self: Muhammad Iqbal’s Reconstruction of Religious Thought</i> By Nauman Faizi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Living at the intersection of different worlds, the early twentieth-century Indian Muslim poet-philosopher and politician-activist Muhammad Iqbal left a significant but undervalued imprint on both modern philosophy and modern history. The academic interest in this significant philosopher has waxed and waned over the past century. Much of it can be simplistically divided between the hagiographic and the critical, each of which can be further divided between works that perceive Iqbal as a progressive or as a reactionary. Over the last two decades, however, academic study of Iqbal has gained a renewed momentum, though with relatively little critical analysis focused on Iqbal’s philosophical magnum opus, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. It is this gap that Nauman Faizi’s (Lahore University of Management Studies) God, Science and Self, Muhammad Iqbal’s Reconstruction of Religious Thought seeks to address. Faizi notes that contemporary commentators have correctly perceived confusion, convolution, and contradiction within the Reconstruction, and that they ‘attribute the work’s ambiguous and troubled plain sense to the chaotic and crisis-ridden intellectual context of colonial modernity’ (p. 5). While Faizi largely agrees with this account, he contends that the primary source of the confusion resides within some obscurity in Iqbal’s epistemology. Faizi argues that Iqbal’s project can be better understood as an effort to expand modern epistemology by distinguishing two distinct kinds of knowing, the representational and the pragmatic. The representational ‘conceives knowledge as descriptive, foundational, binary and essential’, whereas the pragmatic ‘imagines knowledge as performative, probabilistic, vague and contextual’ (p. 8). The pragmatic modifies the connection between physical objects and their description, and the representational prevents the potential relativistic consequences of subjective epistemology, thereby better resolving the crisis created by modernity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".