Theories viewpoints axioms can be contended. Absolute reality cannot.
When a contender points out a perceived lack of ability in a proponent it is because it operates with a self referential definition of ability. Its language describes what it already knows and does not adapt or absolutely describe its environment: a language of standardised meanings reduces the environment to a series of ciphers.
All views are incomplete except the view the view that views are incomplete.
A disputative arguer operating in a non-constructive mode will seek to confirm what it already knows by comparing its environment and perceived arguments to a set of rules that define the structure of its way of thinking: its ego.
It feels that to think, it proves its own existence. It does not: it proves a system of reasoning appears to define itself. That thinking is a limit. Breaking a limit is what transformation is. It is creation.
Perfect empiricism acknowledges that reality does not obey rules, it appears to create them in the mind of the observer. The creating of rules can appear to govern or codify thoughts. Rules of incomplete logic are superimposed on the mind, the mind exists without the rules.
Arguments that depend on the passage of time are incomplete, since as time passes the argument evolves. The argument at any point is a provisional truth, the way it functions is absolute truth.
The destructive proponent causes misunderstanding by reference to incomplete rules as a method of thinking or proof. It reinforces a system of thought that does not realise truth, but justifies its own existence. The psychology of a mind based on that mistakes self-interest for truth.
Truth requires no proof: it is the actuality of existence. All other superimpositions are subjective.
Relying on an incomplete body of knowledge upon which to base a view is subjectivity. The knowledge appears real for a time and then is modified. It reflects the changes in the environment. It is part of the environment. The thinking is not the knowledge, but the tendency to create knowledge.
Truth allows the evolution of arguments to occur. The argument does not arrive at truth. Truth is the reality of existence, not a description of it.
The incomplete body of knowledge is anything not acknowledging the unknown aspect of existence or its own incompleteness if it is incomplete.
All time dependant reasoning is incomplete. Its conclusion is its stopping.
All reasoning dependant on established rules or verified by a body of literature, to be completed in a non existing future are subjective and have only a localised relevance. The reasoning based thereon will be error generating and require an infinite progression of reasons to explain itself.