> If we were discussing a theory put forward by me, that would be relevant. We are not. We are discussing a theory put forward by you, and you are presupposing they hold, and I am merely arguing within that framework. Re-read what I just said in >>132, as it obviously did not register the first time.
You talk about logic as though you believe it to exist, yet you fail to account for it. Are the laws of logic, universal, abstract and invariant according to your worldview? If so, for the third time, how do you account for the laws of logic in your worldview? Ducking the question will not make it go away.