Talk:The Incoherence of the Incoherence

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Khwajazada attacks, critiques, does not defend Ghazzali and does not talk about Ibn Rush at all
In the current version of the article, the following is stated:
 * "In the 15th century, a strong refutation of Ibn Rushd's arguments was written by an Ottoman scholar, Mustafá ibn Yūsuf al-Bursawī (d. 1487, also known as Khwājazāda), defending al-Ghazali's views."

It is baseless, Khwajazada does not cite Ibn Rush, he does not even talk about him. even more, in the introduction section, Khwajazada explicitly states that he is gonna expose some of the wrongs of Al Ghazzali's Tehafitul Felasifa book. Why is this given as "strong refutation of Ibn Rush"? --81.213.215.83 (talk) 06:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Sourcing
There's only one source for this article, and it doesn't mention many of the topics brought up. For instance, the article states that in "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" al-Ghazali was narrowly focused on a critique of Neoplatonist metaphysics, and not on sub-disciplines like mathematics, astronomy, and physics. However, the sourced article makes no specific mention of metaphysics.

(I'm new to wikipedia editing so I apologize in advance if this isn't the best way to go about this. The article on tagging mentioned that many see it as poor form to tag as opposed to fixing, so I decided it might be best to bring this up in the talk section.) Gxvx (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2021 (UTC)