Western scholarship is biased against narratives of Muhammad’s success

Evidence

As Rahman says, “Western critics … [are] so addicted … to pathetic tales of sorrow, failure, frustration, and crucifixion that the very idea of success in this sphere seems abhorrent,” Islam, 19. — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1466 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The critic is always immanent and implicated in the conditions he or she seeks to explore, never transcendent. It is impossible to stand outside that nexus of framing perspectives that, I have suggested, often result in latent Islamophobia. As a critic trained in hermeneutical practices that are historically and culturally specific, I would be disingenuous to claim any better knowledge or more objective perspective. Nonetheless, it is possible to advocate—and try to practice—a certain critical self-consciousness in our engagement with non-Western literatures. — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 60 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Throughout the near fourteen centuries of Islam, Christians have defended their faith in the Trinity and Incarnation from Muslim attack; and they have in turn attacked Islam for accepting the claim of Muhammad to be the vehicle of Revelation, chiefly on the grounds that his character made it impossible reasonably to do so. Finally they have had to decide upon the admixture of truth and error: how to estimate its value, how to allow for the error, how to balance judgement upon the significance of each, and how to assess the final result. In respect of these points the mediaeval concept proved extremely durable; this outline of it is still a part of the cultural inheritance of the West to-day. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1534 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Modern Western scholars retained medieval judgements about Muhammad.; Western scholars resist Muhammad’s success because they romanticize failure and martyrdom. — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1466; Outsider scholarship on Islam reads better to Western lay readers than insider accounts (+17 more)

Broader Connections

• Western scholars resist Muhammad’s success because they romanticize failure and martyrdom. #corroborates (1.00) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1466
• Christian polemic on Muhammad’s character still shapes Western cultural inheritance #expands (1.00) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1534
• The West’s polemical image of Islam was self-serving rather than descriptive #corroborates (1.00) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1508
• Western critics cannot transcend the Islamophobic frame from outside #corroborates (1.00) — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 60
• Outsider scholarship on Islam reads better to Western lay readers than insider accounts #complicates (0.90)
• Pre-modern Muslim scholars regarded Western history as lacking value and purpose #complicates (0.80) — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 1060
• Scholarly hostility to Shi’ism distorted Orientalist accounts of Islam #complicates (0.80) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 401
• Western study of Islamic history moved from credulity to critical method to total rejection #complicates (0.80) — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 1963
• Denying outside influence on Islam distorts historical scholarship #complicates (0.70) — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 326
• Hostility to Islam could motivate sound, critical scholarship rather than crude polemic #complicates (0.70) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 164
• Modern Western scholarship on Islam still rests largely on Goldziher’s foundation #complicates (0.70)
• Western scholars framed Islam as a failed derivative of Greek thought #complicates (0.70) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 291