Algazel
Taleb discusses the 11th-century Arabic-language thinker Al-Ghazali, known in Latin as Algazel, as a skeptic of confident causal reasoning. He connects that critique with later philosophical and religious developments in a broad historical interpretation.
THE IDEA
Algazel
The third major thinker who dealt with the problem was the eleventh-century Arabic-language skeptic Al-Ghazali, known in Latin as Algazel. His name for a class of dogmatic scholars was ghabi, literally “the imbeciles,” an Arabic form that is funnier than “moron” and more expressive than “obscurantist.” Algazel wrote his own Against the Professors, a diatribe called Tahafut al falasifah, which I translate as “The Incompetence of Philosophers.” It was directed at members of the school called falasifah— the Arabic intellectual establishment was the direct heir of the classical philosophy of the academy, and they managed to reconcile it with Islam through rational argument.
Algazel’s attack on “scientific” knowledge started a debate with Averroës, the medieval philosopher who ended up having the most profound influence of any medieval thinker (on Jews and Christians, though not on Moslems). The debate between Algazel and Averroës was finally, but sadly, won by both. In its aftermath, many Arab religious thinkers integrated and exaggerated Algazel’s skepticism of the scientific method, preferring to leave causal considerations to God (in fact it was a stretch of his idea). The West embraced Averroës’s rationalism, built upon Aristotle’s, which survived through Aquinas and the Jewish philosophers who called themselves Averroan for a long time. Many thinkers blame the Arabs’ later abandonment of scientific method on Algazel’s huge influence—though apparently this took place a few centuries later. He ended up fueling Sufi mysticism, in which the worshipper attempts to enter into communion with God, severing all connections with earthly matters. All of this came from the Black Swan problem.
When to use it
When evaluating scientific claims, one might consider whether there is a tendency to attribute causality to supernatural forces instead of seeking natural explanations.
In debates about free will versus determinism, Algazel's views on God as the only cause can be invoked.
In organizational decision-making, the Algazelian perspective warns against overconfidence in causal models.
When studying science and religion, comparing Taleb’s interpretation of Algazel’s influence with more detailed historical accounts.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
The Debate on Causality
Taleb presents Algazel as challenging the necessity of the connection between cause and effect and reserving causal power to God. He contrasts later uses of this skepticism with traditions associated with Averroës. This is the book’s broad interpretation, rather than a complete account of either intellectual tradition.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How does Algazel's skepticism challenge our everyday assumptions about cause and effect?
In what ways might a tendency to attribute events to divine will hinder scientific progress?
When does skepticism about a causal claim prompt a better investigation, and when does it become a refusal to consider evidence?
Often confused with
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- The Black Swan The Impact of the Highly Improbable With a new section On Robustness and Fragility (Nassim Nicholas Taleb)