Is It ‘Reasonable’ for Individual Muslims to Ignore Arguments against Islam?
If you are firmly persuaded by the central evidence for the Islamic faith and are equally dissuaded by the alternative competing worldviews (e.g. Christianity, religious pluralism, etc.), do not feel compelled to rebut every single argument against Islam. You need to first measure the motivations (rational, social, emotional, etc.) there are for being a Muslim and then weigh them in contrast to arguments for disbelieving in Islam. If the arguments are not threatening enough to overturn the force of the good reasons you have for being a Muslim, then you can reasonably rest satisfied with your Islamic faith. I emphasize that it is reasonable lest somebody thinks that ignoring anti-Islamic arguments somehow connotes that one has blind faith.
It is not reasonable to address every single argument against Islam, let alone physically possible. Instead, one must assess the implication of arguments. Some arguments are merely distractions having no ultimate bearing on the truth. An example of such arguments is those related to ethics (the vast majority of them). If your foundational approach to ethics is accurate from the get-go (i.e., there is no objective source of morality independent of God; thus, you cannot reject revelation solely because its ethical teachings contradict a subjective standard of morality), then anti-Islamic arguments related to sexual ethics, human rights, etc. should not shake your faith at its core to the brink that you start intellectually doubting your faith.
On the other hand, there are arguments whose implications are problematic. If these arguments are true, then Islam’s veracity is threatened. Here, you have a number of reasonable choices before you:
Choice #1: You can simply not expose yourself to these arguments and trust that there are good responses to them. This is reasonable, presuming you acknowledge to yourself that if you do not have the means, time, patience, and determination to refute these arguments, then it is reasonable for you to not expose yourself to them. If you are going to do something, do it right. Choice #1 is only reasonable for one who is already rationally justified in adopting Islam because of the evidence for it and even more so for rejecting alternative worldviews on rational grounds as well.
Choice #2: You can expose yourself to these arguments to refute them for the benefit of the ummah or because you have an intellectual curiosity that cannot be quenched unless you address them. We are treading in dangerous territory right now. We have to be realistic and acknowledge that reciting Ayat al-Kursi works in thwarting the whispers of the devil, but it will not answer that orientalist argument against the credibility of hadeeth for you. Now, here, you also must be “reasonable” and patient. The advice provided in choice #1 also applies to choice #2. It is not “reasonable” to dive deep into any subject without having a strong foundation in that given subject. If you do not know the basics of hadeeth sciences, you have no business reading, in addition to expecting to be able to respond to, the arguments of the kuffar and heretics against the science of hadeeth. Surely, it would help if you recognized that it is unreasonable to answer experts on a subject in which you are hardly even a beginner. If you want to do something, do it right; otherwise, acknowledge your limitations and adopt choice #1.
I can add more choices and be more nuanced with the ones already mentioned, but I do not wish to make this any lengthier. In summary, the main points I want to leave you with are:
1) Being reasonable does not require that you literally refute every single argument against your stance, but that you have sufficiently good reasons for believing yours to be correct and alternative views are false, and
2) We must learn to weigh the force of arguments and their implications. Hundreds of arguments could be dismissed outright if proven to be based on faulty premises. Thus, always prioritize getting your foundational understanding of notions accurate before diving into the deep tertiary ends of polemics. This offered advice is not specific to Islam; it is universal and fundamental in its logic and reasoning. However, there is this false understanding among many that if one were to ignore an argument, this would entail that he is a “blind believer ignoring the truth.”; far from it. At times, it may be more reasonable for you to dismiss arguments than to be bogged down trying to address them.
Recommended Reading
- Providing More Evidence for Islam Does Not Cure Insincerity
- Why Do Intelligent People Reject Islam?
- Is the Evidence for Islam Compelling?
- The Illusion of Academic Objectivity
- The Rationale of Hell in Islam (lecture transcript)
- Will Your ‘Evidence’ Help Before Allah?
- Being Assured of Islam’s Truth via the Process of Elimination
I think the line "This offered advice is not specific to Islam; it is universal and fundamental in its logic and reasoning" ought to be stated earlier and expanded upon. Simply put, this thesis of this article is simply that proofs preserve truth, and because there are proofs for Islam, it must be the case that the opposing arguments are wrong. In fact, I would go as far to say that a practicing, sincere Muslim, with the right theological/rational foundations and enough practice likely already has a higher mode of knowledge- intuition, which would achieve the same impact of proof, except with greater certainty. Whether one wants to dive into refuting the anti-Islam arguments (or any other subject) for the sake of knowledge, debate, etc. depends entirely on how strongly they can maintain their logical, rational, and internal state and would ideally only happen with proper guidance to avoid a catastrophic loss in Imaan.