On some level, he isn’t wrong. It’s all transcribed speeches, sort of like how we have no surviving writings of Aristotle, only notes taken by students during his lectures, or of course like the new testament which is a compendium of books written by people ranging from a few years after Jesus’ death all the way out to a century thereafter.
The grammar mistakes claim in the Quran isn’t an illegitimate claim. It’s no secret there are minor corrections made throughout the book. It also keeps the original grammar in the text as method of preservation of the text. The stupid part was questioning the legitimacy of the Prophet like that. It’s like a Jewish Rabbi going “Did Moses actually write the 10 commandments?”
Since this article is about pedantry I’d like to point out that I believe you meant to reference Socrates not Aristotle there - Socrates believed that education came through dialog and committing words to paper made them “dead” and open to misinterpretation. Socrates was essentially afraid that people would read words of his and pick apart technicalities so he preferred to teach people orally and then have those people teach others.
Plato may have committed some of these conversations to writing after the fact, though Plato may have also just used Socrates as a mouth piece to express his own idea. I’d classify both Plato and Socrates as chill… Aristotle on the other hand absolutely lacked any chill.
Aristotle wrote a lot and wrote it to achieve political gains - his philosophy was the one primarily embraced by Western Europe and is deeply flawed with a lot of extra built in misogyny (Plato was relatively progressive but still has some built in misogyny) and other bullshit. We do have surviving writing as notes from his students but most of his writing is actually his own.
He did, but none of those writings survived to make it to us. All of his extant “works” are in fact lecture notes taken by his students. The Penguin translation of Nicomachean Ethics for example is beautifully done in a way that makes that very evident.
Pretty sure I’ve heard or read that the Quran is supposed to be the literal word of God and any human who was holding the pen was merely a conduit.
Therefore any mistakes are not, in fact, mistakes because God is infallible and that would be impossible. As such, we should amend our own grammar to match the Quran and not the other way around.
Anyone who suggests otherwise should be dealt with accordingly.
I’m not saying I agree with this logic, only that there is a perverse kind of sense to it.
As for “but it’s written one way in one paragraph and in another way in another paragraph” well you’ll just have to derive what context is responsible for the change in grammar and adjust yourself accordingly. Consult your local mullah. But be careful how you ask your question or you might end up on the run.
(May I suggest claiming you were confused by a different dialect of Arabic.)
On some level, he isn’t wrong. It’s all transcribed speeches, sort of like how we have no surviving writings of Aristotle, only notes taken by students during his lectures, or of course like the new testament which is a compendium of books written by people ranging from a few years after Jesus’ death all the way out to a century thereafter.
The grammar mistakes claim in the Quran isn’t an illegitimate claim. It’s no secret there are minor corrections made throughout the book. It also keeps the original grammar in the text as method of preservation of the text. The stupid part was questioning the legitimacy of the Prophet like that. It’s like a Jewish Rabbi going “Did Moses actually write the 10 commandments?”
Since this article is about pedantry I’d like to point out that I believe you meant to reference Socrates not Aristotle there - Socrates believed that education came through dialog and committing words to paper made them “dead” and open to misinterpretation. Socrates was essentially afraid that people would read words of his and pick apart technicalities so he preferred to teach people orally and then have those people teach others.
Plato may have committed some of these conversations to writing after the fact, though Plato may have also just used Socrates as a mouth piece to express his own idea. I’d classify both Plato and Socrates as chill… Aristotle on the other hand absolutely lacked any chill.
Aristotle wrote a lot and wrote it to achieve political gains - his philosophy was the one primarily embraced by Western Europe and is deeply flawed with a lot of extra built in misogyny (Plato was relatively progressive but still has some built in misogyny) and other bullshit. We do have surviving writing as notes from his students but most of his writing is actually his own.
He did, but none of those writings survived to make it to us. All of his extant “works” are in fact lecture notes taken by his students. The Penguin translation of Nicomachean Ethics for example is beautifully done in a way that makes that very evident.
What writings should I read to see examples of “built-in misogyny” (I’ve only read The Republic way back in undergrad)?
Pretty sure I’ve heard or read that the Quran is supposed to be the literal word of God and any human who was holding the pen was merely a conduit.
Therefore any mistakes are not, in fact, mistakes because God is infallible and that would be impossible. As such, we should amend our own grammar to match the Quran and not the other way around.
Anyone who suggests otherwise should be dealt with accordingly.
I’m not saying I agree with this logic, only that there is a perverse kind of sense to it.
As for “but it’s written one way in one paragraph and in another way in another paragraph” well you’ll just have to derive what context is responsible for the change in grammar and adjust yourself accordingly. Consult your local mullah. But be careful how you ask your question or you might end up on the run.
(May I suggest claiming you were confused by a different dialect of Arabic.)