rationalskepticism.org

ughaibu wrote:

GrahamH wrote:What the "living fuck" do you think is incompatible with deteterminism in:

taken to be of sound mind and not acting under coercion

So, you don't remember the argument that established the libertarian position for all defnitions of free will to which your objection was that there is a disembodied god with no sense organs but free will?
Well, to remind you:

ughaibu wrote:

zoon wrote:when exercising (compatibilist) free will.

Let's consider the following argument:
1. life requires irreversibility
2. a determined world is fully reversible
3. therefore, there can be no life in a determined world
4. free will requires life
5. therefore, incompatibilism is the case
6. therefore, if there is free will, the libertarian position is correct.

Pretending that you can't keep track of the discussion is not a reasonable way to justify your position. It is a way of demonstrating to your reader that one of three possibilities obtain, 1. you are too stupid to follow the discussion, 2. you are lying about what you remember has gone on in the discussion, or 3. you are plain crazy and living in your own fantasy world.
By some bizarre piece of internet political correctness it seems that none of these conclusions can publicly be drawn on this site.
My view is that denialists can be classed as insane, in the legal sense, because they can't distinguish P from not-P. Perhaps that gives us a reason to look forward to Zoon's distopian future in which mechanical scientists run around rearranging the human brains that they don't like.

Anyway, fuck off, you really are an unconscionable idiot.