Bibliographic record
Abstract
When do revolutions end? How do revolutions live on in embodied affects, relationships, and horizons of aspiration? This article describes the remaking of religion among upper-middle-class Egyptians who participated in the 2011 uprising. It traces a widespread turn to Sufism, yoga, and meditation, along with the search for a personal connection to God. My interlocutors’ spiritual bricolage could easily be read as an effect of political defeat, neoliberal self-care, or part of a global trend of declaring oneself “spiritual-but-not-religious.” Yet such contextualizing moves fail to grasp the sense of newness, surprise, and experimentation that pervades my interlocutors’ narratives. I suggest that the revolution’s indeterminacy is kept alive through the ethos of experimentation. Post-revolutionary spiritual bricolage results in seemingly apolitical practices like Sufi yoga, but from these practices a revolutionary spark can re-emerge. ملخص متى تنتهي الثورات؟ وكيف تعيش الثورة بعد انتهائها وتستمر في المشاعر والأفكار والعلاقات والآفاق والأحلام؟ يصف هذا المقال إعادة تشكيل الدين بين المصريين من الطبقة المتوسطة العليا الذين شاركوا في ثورة 52 يناير. يتتبع المقال التحول نحو الصوفية واليوغا والتأمل، إلى جانب السعي للبحث عن اتصال شخصي بالله. يمكن تفسير هذا التحول نحو الروحانية بسهولة كنتيجة للهزيمة السياسية، أو كجزء من الفردانية النيوليبرالية، أو باعتباره جزءًا من الاتجاه العالمي المعروف بالانتماء إلى االروحانية ولكن غير الدينية اومع ذلك فإن التفسير من خلال هذا السياق قد يفشل في استيعاب روح المغامرة والمفاجأة والتجريب التي تبرز في روايات من حاورتهم. يقترح هذا المقال أن روح الثورة التجريبية كانت حية في تلك التجارب، وأن روح التخبط والتجريب والإبداع ما بعد الثورات تنتج العديد من الممارسات غير المسيسة أو التي تتنافى مع الفعل السياسي، مثل اليوغا الصوفية وغيرها ولكن من بين هذه الممارسات قد تنبثق شرارة ثورية جديدة.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".