Islam gives you a source of answers about meaning and morality, if you accept it's core claims (an assumption I'll touch on in a bit). While reason is valued in islamic thought, in the way I see it, it works alongside revelation rather than serving (or trying to serve) as the only final authority. On the other side, contemporary thinkers use reason, evidence and argument; they might simply decline to treat revelation as authoritative unless it can be, kinda, justified. In other words, Islam offers a more unified framework if it's revelation claims are true (which, as far as I'm concerned, can neither be proved or disproved in any way by using more, let's say, scientific methods, at least in 2026). When it comes down to assumptions, ''secular epistomologies'' also start from them (such as what counts as knowledge etc). The comparison really comes down to which starting points are best supported and what each can explain.

P.S. also, they don't have to always contradict each other