The Idea
This claim portrays a long history of reservations toward the philosophy of Averroes and those who stood alongside him in the project of rational thought, such as Avicenna, al-Farabi, and Miskawayh. The point here is not merely hostility toward specific names, but rather an indication of the narrow space afforded to philosophy when it is read as a free inquiry into knowledge, the human being, and the world, rather than as a direct subordinate to prior submission.
Condensed Formulation
Islamic thought remained hostile to the philosophy of Averroes, Avicenna, al-Farabi, and Miskawayh
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim lies at the heart of the argument that seeks to show that the Islamic tradition did not grant philosophical thinking a stable and permanent place. Invoking Averroes is not meant only to glorify him, but to show that the trajectory of philosophy remained fragile and contested. From here, exclusion becomes a sign of a troubled relationship between religion and rational thought in cultural history.
Why It Matters
This idea helps explain why Arkoun repeatedly returned to the names of philosophers who were marginalized. It reveals that the question of reason is not incidental, but was once present and then receded. It also shows that any reading of Islamic intellectual history needs to pay attention to what was preserved and what was pushed aside, not only to what remained in the public memory.
Brief Evidence
Islamic thought, for the most part, remained hostile to the philosophy of Averroes Islamic thought, for the most part, remained hostile to the philosophy of Averroes and Avicenna
Reading Questions
- Does the text mean an absolute hostility to philosophy, or a historical narrowing of its presence?
- How does this claim change the image of the relationship between the juristic tradition and the philosophical tradition?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear place in the book’s material.