Wasu Musulmi masu kawo gyara, ko Musulman da ke goyon bayan wasu matsayi na kawo gyara, kan yi amfani da wata ra'ayi ta malamai ta dā, mai wuya kuma ba a saba ba, don goyon bayan ra'ayinsu. Wannan, hakika, "zaɓen abin da ya dace" ne (cherry picking), kuma rashin gaskiya ne a ilimi. Wannan ita ce irin sukar da za mu yi wa ƙungiyoyin ta'addanci kamar ISIS da yadda suke karanta rubutun Musulunci. Abin da ISIS da waɗannan masu kawo gyara suke yi shi ne hujja bayan abu ya faru (post hoc justification). Suna da abin da suke so su cimma tun farko, ko ta'addanci na siyasa ne ko wata akida ta 'yanci (liberal), ko ma menene. Sai su bincika teku mai girma na ilimin Musulunci don neman duk wani abu da zai iya goyon bayan manufarsu ta musamman.

Sometimes Muslim reformists or Muslims taking on certain reformist positions will cite a rare, unusual classical opinion to support their view. This is, of course, “cherry picking” and it is intellectually dishonest. This is the same critique we would make against terror groups like ISIS and their approach to Islamic texts. What both ISIS and these reformists are doing is post hoc justification. They already have something they want to accomplish, whether it is advancing political terror or advancing some liberal ideology, whatever the case may be. And then they scan the vast sea of Islamic scholarship for anything that might lend support to their particular agenda.