This paper critically engages with Ian Barbour’s influential fourfold typology of conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration, widely used to describe the relationship between science and religion. While Barbour’s framework has shaped decades of discourse, it remains largely grounded in modern Western, predominantly Christian contexts and often fails to capture more ethically structured approaches found in other intellectual traditions. In response, the paper turns to the thought of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, offering a close analytical reconstruction of his epistemology and its implications for the relationship between scientific and religious knowledge. The study shows that al-Ghazali does not reject scientific inquiry as such, but rather situates it within a broader normative framework governed by ethical and spiritual ends. His position recognizes the legitimacy of empirical and rational disciplines, particularly in fields such as mathematics, astronomy, and medicine, while subjecting metaphysical extrapolations and epistemic overreach to theological and philosophical scrutiny. On this basis, the paper suggests that al-Ghazali’s thought may be interpreted as articulating what can be described as an Ethical-Hierarchical Model (EHM) of knowledge, in which different forms of inquiry are ordered according to their epistemic scope and moral purpose. Rather than proposing a new theoretical framework inde-pendently of the historical analysis, this model is presented as a conceptual recon-struction derived from al-Ghazali’s own writings. By foregrounding the ethical orien-tation of knowledge and the hierarchical organization of epistemic domains, the study aims to contribute to a broader re-evaluation of science–religion relations beyond the limits of existing typologies.

Received 04 April 2026. Revised 28 April 2026. Accepted 17 May 2026. Published online 06 July 2026

Ian Barbour, Al-Ghazali, Science and Religion, Ethical-Hierarchical Model, Epistemic Pluralism,