The philosopher must not only be able to see and show the fact that someone else whent about it in such and such a way; his insight must not only extend to the connections between the other's grounds [Grund] and consequences. The philosopher must also grasp why his predecessor went about it like this. He must get down intot he grounds themselves and grasp them. And this means that the grounds must grip him and best him in the sense that he decides to accept them and retraces within himself the path the othe rfollowed from gorunds to conclusions, perhaps even going beyond him. Or else he must best the grounds; I mean, he must decide to get free of them and take another path. To be bested by St. Thomas's "grounds" means to vanquish him philosophically for ourselves. To best his grounds means to "be done" with him philosophically.
Edith Stein, Potency and Act, ICS (Washington, D.C.: 2009) p. 3. Of course, this is quite general: regardless of the philosopher, we must in the end be bested by their grounds, and thus vanquish that philosopher for ourselves, conquer the mountain of their thought, or we must best their grounds, showing (not, of course, merely assuming) that there is a better way.