Thus, although some of those who affirm the caliphate of the four caliphs and the superiority of the two Shaykhs espouse flawed views, the views of the Rāfidah are even more flawed. Likewise, although those affiliated with the Sunnah who debate the philosophers and the Mu'tazila—such as al-Ash'arī and his peers—may espouse false views, the views of the Mu'tazila and the philosophers contain even greater falsehood. Therefore, whenever a debate takes place between two of these groups, it is necessary to demonstrate, through reason and transmitted evidence, the superiority of the position held by the group that is closer to the Sunnah. We must never support a false position that conflicts with divine law and reason. Doing so is forbidden and blameworthy, and whoever does so is censured for it. It gives rise to indescribable evil, just as such evil has arisen from innovated doctrines. A fuller treatment of these matters belongs elsewhere. Allah knows best.

The purpose here is to draw attention to the proper manner of fair debate, in which a person speaks with knowledge and justice, not with ignorance and injustice. As for debates between groups that each depart from the Sunnah, even if only slightly, the greatest benefit to be gained from them is seeing how each group invalidates the doctrine of another.

Abū Hāmid al-Ghazālī and others believe that this benefit alone is the purpose of speculative theology. Yet he also believes that the creed he presented is the creed whose profession the Lawgiver required of people as an act of worship, while maintaining that, in certain matters, it has an inner meaning that conflicts with its outward meaning. The creed he presented agrees with divine law in one respect but not in another. As for what is authentically established from the Messenger, its inner meaning does not contradict its outward meaning. The point here is that the purpose of debate should be to demonstrate the superiority of some positions over others.] (1)