The fallacies of the polytheists in the Holy Qur'an

This study examines the statements of the polytheists in the Qur'an concerning divinity (ulūhiyyah), the Hereafter (ākhirah), prophethood (nubuwwah), and the Qur'an itself, and aims to evaluate the modes of reasoning underlying these statements within the framework of logical fallacies. The discourse of the polytheists in the Qur'an is approached not merely as a historical phenomenon but as a systematic strategy aimed at persuading both the individual and society. In this context, data concerning the theological, social, and political structures of the polytheists have been analyzed; and it has been demonstrated how, in their process of rejecting revelation, they employed a manipulative language and sought to distort the truth through various fallacious arguments. In this study, the document analysis method has been employed. The Qur'anic verses containing polytheistic statements were analyzed in light of both classical and modern tafsīr literature, with due consideration of their historical contexts, in order to determine their fallacious nature and value. Furthermore, comparative evaluations were conducted to identify the frequency with which specific types of fallacies were employed and to ascertain the preferred targets toward which these fallacious arguments were directed. According to the research findings, the polytheists deviated from the monotheistic conception of God (tawḥīd) due to their belief in multiple deities, their attribution of divinity to angels and jinn, and their legitimization of polytheism through ancestral veneration. Moreover, unwilling to accept the new religion, the polytheists sought to discredit the prophets and diminish their influence within society by labeling them with derogatory and distortive accusations—such as sorcerer, madman, or deviant. These statements correspond to several types of logical fallacies, including ad hominem, poisoning the well, loaded language, and appeal to false authority. In addition, in an attempt to undermine the divine message, the polytheists accused the source of revelation of being sorcery, confused dreams, or tales of the ancients. Through such statements, they sought to generate a negative public perception of the new religion. By using disparaging expressions toward the believers—such as weak, narrow-minded, or lowly followers—they aimed to weaken the social legitimacy of the new faith and to create the impression that it was unworthy of intellectual or moral consideration. Furthermore, it has been observed that among the various fallacies employed by the polytheists, the types most frequently utilized were ad hominem, false cause, straw man, and poisoning the well. Remaining within the designated parameters of the research, this study provides a comparative examination of the rhetoric and assertions directed at Islam and its values by modern detractors, contrasting them with the discourses prevalent during the period of revelation and the missions of previous prophets. The findings indicate that the cognitive processes of contemporary and historical deniers share a fundamental structural similarity, whereas their approaches and attitudes have merely assumed a reconfigured or masked form. In conclusion, the statements of the polytheists addressed in the Qur'an should not be regarded as random or ordinary reactions, but rather as deliberately constructed, propagandistic, and strategically motivated actions intended to obscure the truth through the use of fallacies. This finding is significant in that it reveals the Qur'an's structure as one grounded in critical reasoning and underscores its aim of intellectually awakening and enlightening its audience.