Formulation of the claim

Al-`Amiri demonstrates the supremacy of Islam through presuppositions and set phrases.

Explanation

This claim refers to a way of presenting Islam that begins by presuming its superiority, then reinforces that presumption with inherited formulae used as ready-made proofs. In this part of Arkoun’s thought, presuppositions are not understood as historical or critical analysis, but as a formulation that states the conclusion before examining its conditions.

The claim also reveals a tendency to fix meaning through repetition rather than by dismantling the foundations on which the discourse rests. For that reason, the inherited sayings appear here as a means of persuading the reader of Islam’s supremacy, more than as an entry point for questioning or explaining that supremacy.

Its place in the book’s argument

This atom falls within Arkoun’s critique of discourses that turn religion into a set of closed presuppositions and replace historical analysis with declarative expressions endowed with symbolic authority. It comes close to the theses in which Arkoun opposes closed foundationalism when glorification becomes a substitute for understanding, and citation becomes a means of closing debate rather than opening it.

Limits of the claim

This does not mean that every discussion of Islam’s virtue in al-`Amiri amounts to complete closure or to a total absence of any cognitive dimension; rather, it describes a specific mode of argument within the text. Nor should the atom be taken as an all-encompassing judgment on all forms of religiosity or on every use of inherited sayings.

Brief evidence passage

Al-`Amiri presents Islam through presuppositions and inherited sayings that are used as ready-made proofs. Supremacy here is not built on historical or critical analysis, but on a prior acceptance of Islam’s superiority and then the reinforcement of that acceptance with declarative formulations. In this way, the conclusion is presented before the proof.