If you do not actually understand words like equivocation, dilemma, dichotomy, empirical, premise, skeptical, onus, or ambivalence, please use plain words to make your case. If there are words you are reading in a reply you are not familiar with, refer to a dictionary.
The apple does not equivocally choose to be ambivalent towards the metaphysical dichotomy dilemma of onus. See how much nonsense sentences like that are, they are just a word soup of retardation, it means nothing.
Put some effort into making a case for a logical fallacy if you believe an argument is in bad faith.
No, I've used the words correctly, you just don't like that the conclusions don't work with your worldview. I think you didn't realize how unscientific your position actually is. Nor realize how many unfounded assumptions your worldview was making.
You claiming that it is impossible to hold opposing beliefs simultaneously is akin to believing that the earth is flat.
[ + ] The_Reunto
[ - ] The_Reunto 0 points 2 monthsFeb 7, 2024 06:04:48 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug [op] 0 points 2 monthsFeb 7, 2024 06:18:27 ago (+0/-0)
The apple does not equivocally choose to be ambivalent towards the metaphysical dichotomy dilemma of onus. See how much nonsense sentences like that are, they are just a word soup of retardation, it means nothing.
Put some effort into making a case for a logical fallacy if you believe an argument is in bad faith.
[ + ] The_Reunto
[ - ] The_Reunto 0 points 2 monthsFeb 7, 2024 06:50:30 ago (+0/-0)
You claiming that it is impossible to hold opposing beliefs simultaneously is akin to believing that the earth is flat.
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug [op] 0 points 2 monthsFeb 7, 2024 06:59:08 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] The_Reunto
[ - ] The_Reunto 0 points 2 monthsFeb 7, 2024 09:39:20 ago (+0/-0)