Philosophy and scriptural interpretation › Assessing the reconciliation

The project depends on more than the slogan that truth agrees with truth. A reader has to assess the conception of demonstration, the interpretation of scriptural commands, the linguistic constraints on figurative reading, and the classification of audiences. Each component does work. Accepting one does not automatically establish the others.

The argument's internal form is nevertheless clear. An activity commanded by the law needs its appropriate instruments. Knowledge can be inherited across religious boundaries while remaining subject to criticism. A true conclusion cannot conflict with a true revelation, though it can conflict with an apparent reading. Teaching must then consider how its audience can understand and assent.

The principle can be tested through the hypothetical conflict with which we began. First establish whether the philosophical argument warrants its conclusion. Then ask whether the apparent scriptural meaning is required by the language and context. Finally examine the proposed interpretation and the conditions of communicating it. Moving through those questions prevents a declaration of harmony from replacing the work of reconciliation.

Averroes offers qualified philosophical inquiry a place inside religious obligation. He also asks that inquiry to accept obligations concerning its readers. The resulting tension is part of the book's substance: a defense of the philosopher's work can coexist with restrictions that many readers will reject. Reading the treatise well means being able to explain both the defense and the cost.