Christian polemics against Islam argued from premises only Christians accepted

Evidence

Many of their arguments were founded on premises unacceptable to Muslims. Logically it seems absurd to argue from facts derived from Scripture that Scripture must be sound and the Qur’an in error. Similarly, more general arguments, intended to show that the Islamic claim cannot stand, could have satisfied only men who already shared the writers’ attitude to morals and faith, and their mental background. Such discussion went no distance to bridge the differences between Europeans and Islamic traditions. There was not much to convince the Muslim in what was said. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 272

Categorization

• QUESTION: This mirrors a contemporary epistemic-closure problem: how do arguments recruit only those who already share the arguer’s worldview? A resonance worth chasing for the modern Islamophobia thread.