Does causality give man an excuse?

[Ifat Glassman]

You can't insinuate that it takes "mountains of integrity", "dedication to the truth" and objectivity to accept your position without implying that those who have not accepted your side lack those qualities. You left no room for other valid reasons why someone might disagree.

Where did I say that it takes mountains of integrity to accept my position?

I said it took me mountains of integrity to reach the conclusions I have reached.

How does this logically mean that I think whoever disagrees with me has no integrity?

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

Where did I say that it takes mountains of integrity to accept my position?

I said it took me mountains of integrity to reach the conclusions I have reached.

How does this logically mean that I think whoever disagrees with me has no integrity?

Man, are you still on that "I am a biobot" kick? Well, sorry, biobots don't have integrity. Integrity,as well as all of the other virtues, are only available to those of us who have free will; because in essence, they are all means of volitionally adhering to existence. If you don't have free will -- which, as a biobot you claim you don't -- then you cannot volitionally adhere to existence: You merely act according to your programming. So, no, it doesn't take mountains of integrity to come to the conclusion that you are but a biobot. One cannot claim that they are volitionally adhering to reality in concluding that one has no volition. It's a contradiction, which can't exist in reality.

If you want integrity, then you have to acknowledge that you have free will, and then you have to volitionally adhere to existence.

And since free will in man is obvious via introspection, you are not adhering to reality by volitionally claiming that you are a biobot -- even if you claim you are doing so according to your programming.

You can't have it both ways.