Sword,
Wow, you are getting desperate!!
This is just one big euphemism for "Alan Burns disagrees with you and you cannot get him to see things your way"
Your own mathematical analogy has exposed the flaw in your position, namely assuming your position as true. So where's your so-called logic now?
I genuinely don’t know how to make this any simpler for you.
1. There are things called logical fallacies – if you type that term into Wiki you’ll see a list of them
2. AB, you and others attempt arguments that match exactly the structures of various of those fallacies
3. That means that those arguments are wrong without further consideration.
Your only ways out of that are:
1. To claim that AB, you
et al do not attempt arguments that are logically false. That’s easy to refute though because they can just be cut & pasted and compared to the definitions each time you do it;
or2. Claim that logically bad arguments don’t matter in any case (essentially AB’s approach when he tells us that logic is just “man-made” as if in some way the outcome of his false argument thereby makes it a good one).
Both in other words are dead ends, but that’s the corner into which you’ve painted yourself.
As you ignored it the first time, I’ll say it again: when one person says the equivalent of 2+2=5 and the other person explains why 2+2≠5, that’s
not just a difference of opinion.
Capiche?
Anything?
