Religion and the state in Ibn Khaldūn's Muqaddimah
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is an attempt to gain a better understanding of Ibn Khaldun's political theory contained in The Muqaddimah from the stance that religion and his faith in Islam are at the core of his political theory. Though there is a great deal of scholarship that has been dedicated to the interpretation of Ibn Khaldun's political theory contained in The Muqaddimah, there are a limited number of works that deal exclusively with the role of religion in his conception of the State. Those that do tend to either exaggerate Ibn Khaldun's secular thought in the realm of politics or understate his originality as a political scientist. Thus, this study will attempt to prove that his political theory is indeed theocentric by way of examining the true nature of 'aṣabiya, which to Ibn Khaldun was the basis for all forms of human social and political organization, and its relationship with religion in terms of its function in the establishment and propagation of the State. In addition, we will also attempt to dispel the notion that the overall tone of The Muqaddimah is pessimistic and fatalistic; indeed when one examines the political theory contained in The Muqaddimah from a theocentric viewpoint it is made apparent that it was Ibn Khaldun's strong religious convictions that ultimately present a sense of optimism in his work.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".