380
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Aknifeguy@piefed.ca 1 points 6 hours ago

You’re still treating disagreement over classification as if it must stem from prejudice. That leap is doing most of the rhetorical work here.

Let’s slow this down.

My original point referenced two things:

Its founding as a mosque-centered institution of religious learning

Its formal modern accreditation occurring in the 20th century

Neither of those statements automatically equals “therefore it wasn’t legitimate before Europeans approved it.” That’s an inference you’re adding.

You accuse me of shifting definitions, but the definition has actually been consistent: a university in the historical sense is a corporate, self-governing body of scholars with juridical recognition and degree-granting authority embedded in a defined institutional structure.

If al-Qarawiyyin meets that definition in its premodern form, then demonstrate it on those criteria.

What doesn’t advance the argument:

Suggesting that mentioning 20th-century accreditation implies “White Man recognition”

Assuming structural debate equals dismissal of Muslim polities

Treating definitional precision as prejudice

IAt this point the disagreement is very narrow:

Is the term “university” being used: A) descriptively, for any long-standing institution of higher learning that granted advanced credentials or B) technically, for a specific institutional form that originated in medieval Europe and has identifiable structural markers?

That’s the axis of disagreement.

[-] PugJesus@piefed.social 2 points 2 hours ago

You’re still treating disagreement over classification as if it must stem from prejudice. That leap is doing most of the rhetorical work here.

It's not a leap, it's a clear implication of your argument that you're refusing to address.

Prejudice is not necessarily conscious.

My original point referenced two things:

Its founding as a mosque-centered institution of religious learning

Its formal modern accreditation occurring in the 20th century

Neither of those statements automatically equals “therefore it wasn’t legitimate before Europeans approved it.” That’s an inference you’re adding.

Your post referenced those things with the implication that they disqualified al-Qarawiyyin as a university before the 20th century.

You accuse me of shifting definitions, but the definition has actually been consistent: a university in the historical sense is a corporate, self-governing body of scholars with juridical recognition and degree-granting authority embedded in a defined institutional structure.

Okay, would you mind telling me where in that definition your original points of

Its founding as a mosque-centered institution of religious learning

Its formal modern accreditation occurring in the 20th century

Have anything to do with that definition?

Or have the goalposts changed, and you just don't want to admit it.

Suggesting that mentioning 20th-century accreditation implies “White Man recognition”

Suggesting that before 20th century accreditation it wasn't a 'real' university, when accreditation is a fairly late development of European civilization absolutely implies that

Assuming structural debate equals dismissal of Muslim polities

Again, it's not 'structural debate', the dismissal of Muslim polities is inherent to your argument, and I legitimately don't know if you're a chud who knows this, or legitimately too blinkered to see it.

Treating definitional precision as prejudice

Also again, this is anything but precise. Every point I've addressed wherein al-Qarawiyyin has all the aspects of a European university, you've ignored in favor of whinging about your prejudice being called it.

Is the term “university” being used: A) descriptively, for any long-standing institution of higher learning that granted advanced credentials or B) technically, for a specific institutional form that originated in medieval Europe and has identifiable structural markers?

Fuck's sake, this literally and explicitly contradicts your prior arguments.

[-] Aknifeguy@piefed.ca 0 points 1 hour ago

Prove it's a university. You can't because it's not and wasn't until the 20th century. Maybe if you weren't chronically online you might actually know something about it.

[-] PugJesus@piefed.social 0 points 1 hour ago

Prove it’s a university. You can’t because it’s not and wasn’t until the 20th century.

So we are back to the accreditation issue.

Sigh.

[-] Aknifeguy@piefed.ca 0 points 1 hour ago

I rest my case. You clearly can't back up your assertion with facts. Good luck being ignorant for the rest of your life hahahahaha.

this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
380 points (99.2% liked)

History Memes

2061 readers
951 users here now

A place to share history memes!

Rules:

  1. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.

  2. No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.

  3. Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.

  4. Follow all Piefed.social rules.

  5. History referenced must be 20+ years old.

Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world

OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS