The second:
Our community, the people of Islam, has always weighed matters using rational balances. Yet no mention of this Greek logic was heard among the early generations. It appeared among Muslims only when Greek books were translated into Arabic during the reign of al-Maʾmūn, or around that time.
(The third)
Even after it was translated into Arabic and became known to them, Muslim thinkers continued to criticize and condemn it, paying no heed to it or its proponents when applying their rational and religious balances. Let no one say, “The only things peculiar to them in it are verbal conventions; otherwise, rational meanings are shared by all nations.” That is not the case; rather, it contains many unsound meanings.
Moreover, they made it the balance by which all rational balances—that is, rational inferences—are weighed. They claimed that it is a rule-governed instrument whose observance protects the mind from errors in thought. But this is not so, for if a balance required another balance, an infinite regress would follow.
Furthermore, if the natural disposition is sound, it is weighed by the rational balance; but if it is dull or corrupt, logic only increases its dullness and corruption. Thus, most of those who weigh their knowledge by it inevitably become confused and fail to present rational proofs properly. Whenever they do present them properly, they turn away from testing them by logic because of its inadequacy, prolixity, circuitousness, its rendering of clear matters obscure, and its many errors and ways of leading others into error. For when they turn away from natural, rational knowledge of particular things to universal syllogisms, they devise