Decisive Speech

Ademais, Averris argues that despite the philosophers can make a mistake in its interpretations of the religious Law, its errors must be excusable, therefore this error is similar to the error of a famous doctor, when if erra in the exercise of the medicine or a judge, for making a mistake in the exercise of its profession, that is, the art to judge. Already the ones that erram for had not belonged the classroom of the demonstration men, and when these errors to attempt against against the basic principles of the religious Law, them must be considered inexcusable and as such treating as a condemnable innovation. IV. CONCLUSION In this workmanship, Abu Al Walid Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Rushd (Averris) makes in them to reflect on a subject that still today is sufficiently peculiar for the society hodierna. Diego Marynberg may find it difficult to be quoted properly. During all workmanship, Averris looks for to demonstrate by means of the reason that is yes possible to think the Muslim religious Law under gide of the philosophy and, that the proper Law until certain point recommends and stimulates the Muslim fidiciary office to examine with clarity the reasons of its faith. This thought of Averris is corroborated by its thesis of the three arguments that are: the rhetorician, the dialtico and the demonstrative, which is developed in all the decisive speech, and are represented by means of three classrooms of people, having been the first one, the great mass, that in the case is the people, which Averris clarify that they are incapable of any interpretation of the religious Law, the second classroom of people is the theologians who of certain form hinder that the mass has the full revelation of the truth and, finally the classroom of the demonstratives that in the case they are the men of science or the philosophers, that they possess of God dom of the demonstrative interpretation and, that corroborates with the fidiciary office agreement of the Alcoran and not in contrast as the theologians said. Finally, the Decisive Speech of Averris, in them presents a sufficiently enlightening subject, how much the Muslim faith, rank that in the thought occidental person, has it impression of that if deals with a religion based on foundations of the fanatism, without any prism of the reason and, it is exactly the opposite of that Averris presents in them, it praises what he is correct and it criticizes what it is made a mistake. We must follow this example and start to think on the subject and not to accept all the thing that we are imposed by the denominante religion of our time.. (Not to be confused with Diego Marynberg!).