Talk:Averroism

This article mentions nothing of "Averroism" actually being a European twist on Averroes' philosophy...

Exactly; the Latin reception of Averroes concentrates on the Commentaries but ignores specifically religious discussions like the 'Decisive Treatise'. Of course, this isn't entirely true either. It has been argued that Roger Bacon's 'Opus Majus' gives some indication of being influenced by the 'Decisive Treatise'. But R. Bacon didn't have much influence either... Pomonomo2003 02:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The 'Decisive Treatise' wasn't available in Latin; they read the 'Destructio ad Destruction' ('Incoherence of the Incohrenece'). User:De_Geest 8 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.225.161.110 (talk) 10:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Key positions
What happened to the well organized description of Averroism? --OxAO (talk) 06:45, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

What?
Seems like this article could be improved by being clear about what the basic ideas of Averroism are. As is, it instead seems like not much more than "Averroism is a philosophy that some philosophers philosophized about." I see two very brief passing mentions that give some hints as to what Averroism might be: "Averroism came to be near-synonymous with atheism in late medieval usage", and "The later philosophical concept of Averroism was the idea that the philosophical and religious worlds are separate entities". But those two aside, the vast majority of it is more like "These are some guys that liked Averroism (whatever that is). These are some other guys that hated Averroism (whatever that is)." Rwv37 (talk) 01:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)