Formulation of the claim
Many Arab and Muslim intellectuals are unable to evaluate Orientalist research fairly.
Explanation
Arkoun links this shortcoming to a weakness in the ability to distinguish between the scholarly value of such research and the preconceived positions or broad judgments that surround it. The problem is not the existence of criticism of Orientalism, but rather that this criticism is not always grounded in a fair reading that weighs both the findings and the limitations.
The claim appears within Arkoun’s project as part of his call to build a more precise epistemological stance toward Western studies of Islam. Proper engagement with them requires examination and questioning, not blanket rejection or unconditional acceptance.
Its place in the book’s argument
This atom comes within Arkoun’s critique of the ways knowledge about Islam is received in the Arab-Islamic milieu, where the weakness of fair evaluation meets a tendency toward general reactions that do not distinguish between scholarly research and the position or background of its author. In this way, the atom is linked to Arkoun’s effort to establish a reading that is more historical and less reactive, whether in understanding Orientalism or in revisiting prevailing epistemic tools.
Limits of the claim
This atom does not mean that all Orientalist research is equal in value, nor that it is beyond criticism. Nor should it be taken as a defense of Orientalism; rather, it points to a flaw in the mode of evaluation more than to a definitive judgment on the content of that research.