MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407871836 · doi:10.14506/ca40.1.02

Religious Afterlives of a Revolution

2025· article· en· W4407871836 on OpenAlexaff
Amira Mittermaier

Bibliographic record

VenueCultural Anthropology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyReligious studiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultural AnthropologySame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207