Idea
The text attributes to Arkoun an objection to Ibn Rushd’s rationalism when it becomes centralizing and closed, and it likewise sees a dogmatic character in his jurisprudence. What is meant here is not a denial of Ibn Rushd’s value, but an indication that any rationalism, if it closes in on itself, may turn into a narrow framework. The critique therefore comes as a call to move beyond the limits that prevent plurality and openness.
Focused Formulation
Arkoun: criticizes Ibn Rushd because of his closed, centralizing rationalism and his dogmatic jurisprudence
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim falls within the construction of Arkoun’s image as a critical reader of tradition, neither an imitator of it nor one who breaks with it entirely. Its place in the argument is to test the major intellectual models and to show that their presence in history does not mean their sufficiency for every age. It thus serves the book’s central idea: tradition is an object of questioning, not an object of veneration.
Why It Matters
The importance of this statement becomes clear because it reveals Arkoun’s criterion for reading: it is not enough for a thinker to be rationalist in order to be open. It also shows that, for him, critique is directed at the structure of thinking itself, not merely at the philosopher’s name. This helps explain his rejection of any closed certainty, even when it comes from within the Islamic tradition.
Reading Questions
- What does it mean for rationalism to be “centralizing and closed” in this context?
- How does this critique help us understand Arkoun’s position on the Islamic philosophical tradition?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear place in the book’s material.