Religious disagreement could supposedly be settled through necessary rational proofs rather than authority.

Evidence

“Think, gentlemen,” the wise man said to his companions, “of the harm that comes from men not belonging to a single sect, and of the good that would come from everyone being beneath one faith and one religion. This being the case, do you not think it would be a good idea for us to sit beneath these trees, beside this lovely fountain, and discuss what we believe, according to what the flowers and conditions of these trees signify? And since we cannot agree by means of authorities, let us try to come to some agreement by means of demonstrative and necessary reasons [raons necessàries].” — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1311 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

On Llull’s use of “necessary reasons,” see Sebastián Garcías Palou, “Las rationes necessariae del Bto. Ramón Llull, en los documentos presentados por él mismo, a la Sede Romana,” Estudios Lulianos 6 (1962):311–25. — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1960 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Some Christian thinkers knew arguments must rest on reason yet assumed Muslim premises; Reason can defend but not prove the Christian faith.; The is-ought logical problem presupposes a specifically Enlightenment worldview of fact. (+9 more)

Broader Connections

• Llull proposed settling interreligious disputes through rational proof rather than scriptural authority #exemplifies (0.98)
• Llull imagined religious unity achievable through rational proof rather than authority #exemplifies (0.98) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1311
• Llull argued that necessary reasons could prove religious truth. #expands (0.97) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1960
• Arguing against other faiths is impossible without accepting that faith’s authority premises #complicates (0.82) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1970
• Christian-Muslim controversy necessarily centers on their fixed points of doctrinal disagreement #complicates (0.78)
• Confrontation with contrary evidence can intensify rather than weaken firm belief. #complicates (0.74) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 97
• Non-Christians may resist evidence contradicting their beliefs #complicates (0.73) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 4168