They say to you: “Granted that this is so; nevertheless, certain knowledge cannot arise if one simultaneously entertains knowledge of something that contradicts it.”

The point is this: in the truths and items of knowledge that these debaters—and people in general—affirm, they are sounder and more accurate than in the things they deny. A person, after all, is better informed about what he affirms than about what he negates, and his testimony in favour of affirmation is stronger than his testimony in favour of denial. Although negation can sometimes be known with certainty, people’s errors in what they reject and brand as false are far more frequent than their errors in what they accept and endorse.

For that reason the Exalted said:

“Nay, they have denied that of which they could not grasp the full knowledge, and whose interpretation has not yet reached them.” (Qur’an 10: 39)

Accordingly, you will find that a person who follows one particular line of argument—whether to establish knowledge of the Creator, knowledge of prophethood, knowledge of the Hereafter, or anything else—may declare, “There is no way but this one.” In so doing he errs more in what he excludes than in what he includes. Among such people are those who dismiss types of knowledge and avenues of proof that others know by necessity, while affirming what they say is known by necessity. In fact, those others may well be more correct than they are, both in what those others affirm and in what these deny—indeed, even in what these affirm themselves.