Let us suppose that two people are interested in discussing a problem. The first possible obstacle they may confront is language, which is basically the ability to achieve and use complex systems of communication and it relies on social convention and learning. Let us assume for the sake of simplicity that the communication language is the same, however, the subject of debate is not ordinary but more technical. Now, there are a number of possibilities that they can face, either both have a preconception of the subject, neither of them has any idea about the subject or one may possibly have an advantage over the other in terms of technical knowledge. Also, we should remember that the more the discussion tends to cover the details, the more they have to strive to establish a mutual understanding in order to keep the conversation going due to the use of different terminologies and concepts. So, the first question which arises is their subconscious awareness about their possible divergence from the main point of discussion and again being optimistic, we assume that such divergence is not necessarily because of the intentional disagreement but due to the nature of the conclusion drawn, based on their understanding of terms, definitions and vocabularies. Therefore, in order to have a relatively comfortable flowing discussion, there must be at least one or two common points from which it can grow more systematically. Speaking of knowledge, as mentioned above, it can have different meanings depending on how one defines and looks at it. For empiricists, it is acquired by sensibility, hence the ‘experience', whereas for rationalists, it is achievable through reasoning, hence ‘understanding'. Through the former, objects are given to us and through the latter, the objects are thought and understood.