Medieval Christian knowledge systems failed to explain or influence Islam

Evidence

Most conspicuous to us is the inability of any of these systems of thought [European Christian] to provide a fully satisfying explanation of the phenomenon they had set out to explain [Islam]—still less to influence the course of practical events in a decisive way. At a practical level, events never turned out either so well or so ill as the most intelligent observers predicted; and it is perhaps worth noticing that they never turned out better than when the best judges confidently expected a happy ending. Was there any progress [in Christian knowledge of Islam]? I must express my conviction that there was. Even if the solution of the problem remained obstinately hidden from sight, the statement of the problem became more complex, more rational, and more related to experience.… The scholars who labored at the problem of Islam in the Middle Ages failed to find the solution they sought and desired; but they developed habits of mind and powers of comprehension which, in other men and in other fields, may yet deserve success. — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 168

Categorization

• XREF: Southern’s point that systems of thought cannot fully explain their object and rarely influence events echoes the scaffolding-text concern about how representation pre-structures later claims about Islam. — connects to: By 1250 the unity-of-God doctrine was common Christian knowledge about Islam; Medieval Christians weaponized accurate Islamic learning for polemics; Medieval Christian polemicists fixated on Islam’s legal theory while knowing nothing of its practice (+6 more)
• SEED: The observation that events never turned out as the most intelligent Christian observers predicted could anchor an essay on how confident experts systematically misforesee Islam—from medieval theology to modern think tanks.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 168