한
All perspectives

Around 1095

Al-Ghazālī — Critiquing unproved necessity, not philosophy wholesale

Does observed regularity prove necessary causation, or does that add a stronger metaphysical assumption?

Abū Ḥāmid al-GhazālīThe Incoherence of the Philosophers

Evidence-backed account

The Incoherence argues that twenty teachings associated with al-Fārābī and Avicenna have not been demonstratively established, treating three as especially grave religious errors.

Open evidence

This is an evidence-linked editorial paraphrase, not a direct quotation.

  • al-Ghazali

    Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

    Locator: §3 The Incoherence of the Philosophers

    Open source

Al-Ghazālī does not reject logic, demonstration, or natural inquiry wholesale; the seventeenth discussion targets the inference from observed conjunction to necessary causation.

Open evidence

This is an evidence-linked editorial paraphrase, not a direct quotation.

  • al-Ghazali

    Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

    Locator: §3, seventeenth discussion; §4 The Revival of the Religious Sciences

    Open source
Return to the full question