I will provide a controversial thesis statement. First, 'steel-man' the argument by presenting the most rigorous, logically sound, and charitable version of that thesis, avoiding straw-man fallacies. Cite philosophical or empirical foundations where applicable. Second, switch roles and provide a systematic, point-by-point rebuttal to that steel-manned argument, identifying specific weaknesses, assumptions, or counter-evidence. Maintain a neutral, academic tone throughout both sections.