>>32
>>31 isn't me, the original person arguing with you, just to point that out.
However he agrees that you're an idiot.
You haven't given any logic, there's nothing to refute. Our argument is just really that fucking simple that it's easy to re-state.
Deciding on axioms is not a philosophical process. In maths you don't pick axioms because you believe them to be fundamentally true, you pick axioms because you want to study systems that you believe have those axioms.