>I am only allowed to claim that that things exist when I have knowledge about them.
>To claim that I know nothing of ______ requires knowledge about what ______ is.
>Therefore, knowledge is required to claim that there are things I have no knowledge about.
>Therefore, if I have enough knowledge about ______ to say that I know nothing about it, ______ no longer falls under the category of things I know nothing about.
>Therefore, to say that I, Tyler, know little of what can be known is to say that I know of everything that can be known.
>Thus, the most humble position for me to take is to say that the things I know are the only things that are true.
>If the things I know about are the only things that are true, I know everything.
>Arguing the opposite means I automatically claim to know things I do not know, which is arrogant.
