>>>"your plagiarizing . . ."
What plagiarizing, Harv? The more we get into this discussion, the more it seems to me your memory is failing you (perhaps you're confusing this discussion for an entirely different one). I have not plagiarized anyone, nor can even imagine where in these posts you might have perceived plagiarism on my behalf.
>>>Luis: "you're saying, 'there is no such thing as a non-metaphysical argument' (hence, it is left up to me to prove Metaphysics is an illusion)." Harv: "Nothing as complicated as that..."
It's very simple. Proving a negative is virtually impossible. No matter how I build my argument, you see it (my argument) as a fundamentally metaphysical thing. Even the best argument against metaphysics will be considered by you to be a metaphysical thing. You have quite literally admitted this. This view is simply a barrier to the fair consideration of my stance, and instead of wasting more effort or time I must conclude that you are simply not perceptive enough for us to get any further.
I could build a much more redundant argument, but frankly what I perceive to be the odds of you actually understanding it convince me that this would be yet another, only much larger, waste of time (it would require much more than the modest amount of time I spend in here each day).
>>>"You can't support your view."
You can't grasp my view. (Nanny boo boo.)
Harv, you have wasted my time, but as you cannot escape your own barriers I do not blame you, as it were. What angers me is your stupidity, and the time I've dedicated trying to break through it.
The last word is yours.