This text provides a critical reflection on a disputation regarding the concept of non-objectivity (nepředmětnost) held at the Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University in 2004, initiated by Associate Professor Lenka Karfíková. The primary focus of the analysis is the perceived failure of the discussion, which the author attributes to a fundamental lack of consensus concerning the subject matter itself. It is argued that the participants failed to establish whether the debate should address the general problem of non-objectivity or the author's specific interpretation of it. This ambiguity resulted in several participants rejecting the topic outright, while others focused on marginal aspects rather than the core issue. Consequently, the disputation struggled to engage with the essential philosophical problem. The document highlights the importance of precise thematic framing and conceptual clarity in academic discourse. By examining these methodological shortcomings, the author illustrates how a lack of initial agreement can lead to fragmented debate and the neglect of the central philosophical questions at hand.