MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386472072 · doi:10.31121/tader.1316371

What Do Orientalist Qur’anic Studies Mean For a Muslim?

2023· article· en· W4386472072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Necmettin Salih EKİZ

Bibliographic record

VenueTefsir Araştırmaları Dergisi · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamilies in Therapy and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevelationIslamHistory of IslamPresuppositionPhilosophyQuarter (Canadian coin)Period (music)Religious studiesHistoryTheologyClassicsEpistemologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The history of the Qur'an has been one of the most important and most studied areas of ori-entalist Islamic studies for the last two hundred years. Since it is the main source of Islam, the Qur'an has always attracted the attention of orientalists and they have conducted many studies on the Qur'an from various perspectives. Therefore, orientalists became the founders of the history of the Qur'an as a branch of science in its modern sense, and they were the first to determine the main research topics and methods of this field. In terms of their basic paradigms, they do not accept that the Qur'an is a divine revelation sent down to the Prophet Muhammad. The orientalists, who act with the presupposition that Muhammad wrote the Qur’an, or had it dictated, have researched the writing of the Qur'an from the beginning of Muhammad's prophethood to the present day and the stages it has gone through after being a Mushaf. In this direction, first, led by Abraham Geiger (d. 1874), they tried to determine the origin of the Islam and Qur'an, and sought the origin of Islam in the surrounding religions and cultures, especially in the monotheistic religions. Almost simultaneous-ly, by following the path opened by Theodor Nöldeke (d. 1930), who was accepted as the founder of the Qur'anic history in the modern period, they tried to reach the most authentic text and a critical Qur'anic text through studies on the Qur'an manuscripts. In addition to the history of the Qur'anic text, they were also interested in the inner structure of the Qur'an, and they also worked on the rela-tionship between the surahs and verses, in other words, the unity of the text, as well as the order of the surahs and verses. Muslims, on the other hand, entered the history of the Qur'an in its modern sense, after the orientalists, and generally wrote studies aimed at answering their claims. In this study, firstly, Western Qur'anic history literature is presented by considering the historical stages, studies, schools, names, works, basic claims and methods that the history of the Qur'an has gone through from the time it emerged in the modern period to the present day. After presenting the orientalist tradition and accumulation in this way, what all these means for Muslim researchers is discussed. While discussion this, the presuppositions and paradigm differences between the two worlds were taken into consideration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTefsir Araştırmaları DergisiSame topicFamilies in Therapy and CultureFrench-language works237,207