The obsession with reasoning from every possible angle is the death of reasoning: there are no limits to thought, the points of view are never exhausted. This is why any treatise or system that claims to be complete is doomed to failure from the start. Broad reasoning requires the confrontation of opposing propositions and invariably cancels them out one by one when approached with impartiality. If broadens the work, it broadens by annihilating itself and showing itself to be increasingly flawed. For every valid reasoning there is an equally valid contrary reasoning. If the thinker opts for comprehensiveness, he must necessarily give up assertiveness—and, consequently, potency.