[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I'm being a nit here. Had you said "within reason", I'd probably have no qualms. But there is no reason whatsoever for a rationally minded person who is well versed in probabilities to think that any sort of a supreme being is reasonably likely. It is still many times more likely to not be the case than it is to be true.

[/ QUOTE ]

On what basis? There is no way to probabilistically consider a basic abstraction. Any probabilistic claim is actually just subjectivity and intuition. You can talk about probabilities of specific gods, but not of general gods.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, I'm not a math guy so I shouldn't be debating this, but...

There may not be a way to actually determine probabilistic abstraction, but we should be able to consider it.

Just because we do not know the answer to something, doesn't mean it's correct to promote any idea to being reasonably likely.

Of course, much of this depends on how one defines a god. If we include in the criteria to contain everything from super intelligent aliens to David's 5th dimensional kid and his chemistry set as potential gods, the probability does go up. But I'd still quibble that it becomes reasonably likely.