Why El Ghazali should be an example (and not a boogeyman) for philosophers today

In his famous The inconsistencies of the philosophers, El Ghazali showed how the Aristotelian tradition of medieval philosophers, and Avicenna in particular, contradicted itself. Because of this, El Ghazali is sometimes blamed for a perceived subsequent decline of Arab Philosophy. This has given El Ghazali the reputation of an anti-philosopher and a boogeyman for philosophers today. I would argue that that reputation is ridiculous and that instead El Ghazali should be an example for modern philosophers.

    For all that El Ghazali did was show that arguments made by other people were inconsistent and did not work. So even apart from the fact that many historians disagree with the idea of a decline of Arab philosophy altogether, if anyone is to blame for it it should be the people that made the inconsistent arguments and not the one that pointed this out. In fact El Ghazali should be applauded for pointing out these inconsistencies, for with this he prevented serious decisions based on these unsound arguments. 

    And this should be exactly the job of modern philosophers. As philosophers equipped with a critical mind and knowledge of logic, it is their duty to show, just like El Ghazali did, inconsistencies in arguments. When a pseudo-scientist gives an argument against vaccinations, a philosopher should show its inconsistencies. When a politician gives a fatalistic or xenophobic speech, the philosopher should show its inconsistencies. When a bad argument is made, the philosopher should show its inconsistencies. Just like El Ghazali.