MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391540218 · doi:10.26443/jcreor.v3i1.91

Making Sense of the Uyghur Genocide Through Religious Theodicy

2024· article· en· W4391540218 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dilmurat Mahmut, Abdulmuqtedir Udun, Sean Remz, Susan J. Palmer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Council for Research on Religion · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Geopolitics and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenocideTheodicyCriminologyPolitical sciencePhilosophySociologyEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to explore how some Uyghurs in Canada and Türkiye[1] interpret the ongoing Uyghur Genocide through a religious lens, as a form of theodicy, an explanation for evil and suffering.[2] The article is based on data collected from three different sources. The first source is a diary which recorded discussions of individual Uyghurs participating in an online class on the Qur’an taking place in 2021. The second source comes from interviews with two prominent Uyghur Imams who reside in Canada and Türkiye, and the third is an interview with a young Uyghur political activist residing in Canada. From their narratives, we have identified four distinct yet interrelated perspectives, which we have categorized into four categories: gnostic, mythic, apocalyptic, and mystery. Most of the Uyghur voices in our study understand and present the ongoing genocide in East Turkestan[3] as a divine test. Despite understanding the ongoing genocide as a test by Allah, the aspect of divine punishment appears to be downplayed, and instead what is emphasized is the goodness of Allah who seeks to teach His servants lessons so that they may achieve greater virtues in both this life and the afterlife. Our analysis has led us to the conclusion that Uyghur Islam seems to offer its adherents a sense of optimism and, for Uyghurs living in the diaspora, a means to move forward. This is in stark contrast to other forms of Islamic theodicy which focus more on the aspect of suffering. [1]. This spelling follows the Turkish government’s 2022 request for Turkey to be referred to as Türkiye – its spelling and pronunciation in Turkish. See “UN Agrees to Change Turkey’s Official Name to ‘Türkiye,’” Al Jazeera, June 2, 2022, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/2/un-registers-turkiye-as-new-country-name-for-turkey. [2]. John Hick, Evil and the God of Love (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007) and Mark S. Scott, “Theodicy at the Margins: New Trajectories for the Problem of Evil.” Theology Today 68, no.2 (2011): 113–204, https://doi.org/10.1177/0040573611405878. [3]. In this article we will use “East Turkestan” or “the Uyghur Homeland” to refer to the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China. The Chinese term “Xinjiang” means “New Frontier,” “New Borderland,” or “New Territory,” a designation which was given to the region by the Qing dynasty in 1884, so it is politically fraught for Uyghurs because it justifies the displacement of its occupants by Chinese settlers. As the present study focuses on the Uyghur perspective, the preferred Uyghur terms for the region, given above, will be used.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.387
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.098 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Council for Research on ReligionSame topicAsian Geopolitics and EthnographyFrench-language works237,207