[madnak]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if we have an agreed-upon context in which to consider it.

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

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but ideas can only be evaluated relative to other ideas. There's no concrete standard. Further, it's not necessarily incorrect to promote all ideas to "reasonable." The only trouble would be applying that consistently.

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd quibble on what basis?