Can you argue that this loss of ambiguity can happen to all traditions? One can speculate that in the early phases of a tradition, because there is no underlying infrastructure to knowledge generation, systemisation and preservation, there is 'free-for-all' approach to knowledge output. As time passes by, the tradition starts to take shape as more and more scholarly elite begin rationalising the output of previous generations, weighing interpretations against each other and coming to a consensus. Hence a loss of ambiguity. I'm a sense it seems it's rather organic and inescapable, at least to some extent. I wouldn't be surprised if we find this with Christianity, for example.
I think what you're saying is something like this; the less we know the more its open to interpretation, and the more we know and come to discussions we are in a better place to weigh up respective positions. Hence ambiguity and difference of opinion makes sense in the past, but there will be less and less ambiguity for it know.
This maybe quite true for science and some of the hard sciences, where the endeavor of the science is pursual and understanding of hard objective facts. It is is not really what Bauer means by ambiguity; which is perhaps closer to an attitude an ethos.
Puzzle that Bauer serves us, and which Coppens empirically confirms. Why if the earlier authorities were more tolerant of each other's opinions, do the onset of modernity herald a closing or at least narrowing of the hermeneutic door.
According to Bauer, this can be blamed - grossly - on the West and the Enlightenment. Coppens whilst agreeing with the broader claims takes issue with the particulars, he suggests that there are sociological issues involved. He offers reading habits, and milieu as having a power explanatory value, whilst intimating other reasons as well. These reasons are not by and large peculiar to Islam. The implication here being these very reasons, run parallel to why there was a corresponding loss of ambiguity in the West as well.
His ideas of ambiguity while I have issues with them, are interesting and they are worth grappling with. Thank you for your engagement.
Looking forward to reading these reviews. I skipped through to comment that I am reading Bauer’s book very soon; then I will come back to your reviews.
Can you argue that this loss of ambiguity can happen to all traditions? One can speculate that in the early phases of a tradition, because there is no underlying infrastructure to knowledge generation, systemisation and preservation, there is 'free-for-all' approach to knowledge output. As time passes by, the tradition starts to take shape as more and more scholarly elite begin rationalising the output of previous generations, weighing interpretations against each other and coming to a consensus. Hence a loss of ambiguity. I'm a sense it seems it's rather organic and inescapable, at least to some extent. I wouldn't be surprised if we find this with Christianity, for example.
I think what you're saying is something like this; the less we know the more its open to interpretation, and the more we know and come to discussions we are in a better place to weigh up respective positions. Hence ambiguity and difference of opinion makes sense in the past, but there will be less and less ambiguity for it know.
This maybe quite true for science and some of the hard sciences, where the endeavor of the science is pursual and understanding of hard objective facts. It is is not really what Bauer means by ambiguity; which is perhaps closer to an attitude an ethos.
Puzzle that Bauer serves us, and which Coppens empirically confirms. Why if the earlier authorities were more tolerant of each other's opinions, do the onset of modernity herald a closing or at least narrowing of the hermeneutic door.
According to Bauer, this can be blamed - grossly - on the West and the Enlightenment. Coppens whilst agreeing with the broader claims takes issue with the particulars, he suggests that there are sociological issues involved. He offers reading habits, and milieu as having a power explanatory value, whilst intimating other reasons as well. These reasons are not by and large peculiar to Islam. The implication here being these very reasons, run parallel to why there was a corresponding loss of ambiguity in the West as well.
His ideas of ambiguity while I have issues with them, are interesting and they are worth grappling with. Thank you for your engagement.
Thanks for clarifying, keep up the good work
Looking forward to reading these reviews. I skipped through to comment that I am reading Bauer’s book very soon; then I will come back to your reviews.
This is the critical read of his concept of ambiguity that that grew from this review, see what you think. https://themaydan.com/2024/08/ambiguity-as-a-master-key-critically-reading-thomas-bauers-culture-of-ambiguity/