In an article that discusses Hume's lame-ass account of cause, the authors cite this work as an anticipation of Malebranche's Occasionalism. Consisting of a series of 20 "Discussions" the author attempts to deconstruct the title group's claims including their denial of bodily resurrection and their doctrine of the world's past eternity and show how their boastful and arrogant claims fail to deliver and moreover represent heresy. Subtitled "Concerning the Natural Sciences," it essentially represents a rejection of the work Avicenna and al-Farabi. For 10 points, name this 11th century philosophical polemic written by the Sufi mystic Al-Ghazali famously derided by Averroes in a similarly titled work.
In an article that discusses Hume's lame-ass account of cause, the authors cite this work as an anticipation of Malebranche's Occasionalism. Consisting of a series of 20 "Discussions" the author attempts to deconstruct the title group's claims including their denial of bodily resurrection and their doctrine of the world's past eternity and show how their boastful and arrogant claims fail to deliver and moreover represent heresy. Subtitled "Concerning the Natural Sciences," it essentially represents a rejection of the work Avicenna and al-Farabi. For 10 points, name this 11th century philosophical polemic written by the Sufi mystic Al-Ghazali famously derided by Averroes in a similarly titled work.
In an article that discusses Hume's lame-ass account of cause, the authors cite this work as an anticipation of Malebranche's Occasionalism.
The Incoherence of the Philosophers