>>12760834Sure it doesn't follow, but the same is true for your original argument: if it's not x (casual links), then not-x (no casual links) is sound enough. BUT your second option (let's call it F for Faggot, shall we?) is not reducible to randomness, as you've implied. F also allows for the existence of a free-willed soul (call it a conscience, if you will), which by itself defeats your original point.
Hence, the false dichotomy (deterministim vs randomness).
Hence, you're wrong. F. For Faggot.
