discussion 300 words


For Al Ghazali, focus on the methodology of analysis the author uses (read the endnotes). If you created a hierarchy of knowledge, as proposed by the author, what would it look like (hint: a stepped-pyramid is a pretty good visual model)? In what ways can we defend the rationality of reason? Can you think of a way other than the one the author presents?

For the second reading, focus on the structure of the argument. Can you find any weak-points – thing you can use to make a good counterargument? How does this reading relate to the al Ghazali reading? If the claims made by the article are true, what are the consequences for our ideas of science? Links will be attached

About the Author

Follow me

{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}