An objection maintains that scholars agreed on the requirement to act upon reports in the two Sahihs, not on an additional epistemic advantage attached to their truth. If so, scholarly acceptance would not independently show that those reports yield knowledge.
The objection has a recognizable logic: action is required upon authentic hadith established outside the two collections as well. If the Sahihs' special merit were reduced to action alone, it would be difficult to identify what distinguishes their evidential standing.
The answer therefore turns on the difference between acting on everything proven authentic and a special advantage concerning authenticity itself.