(October 24, 2017 at 6:16 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(October 19, 2017 at 11:02 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: ...I've shown in the past that the notion of a greatest conceivable being is incoherent, though you didn't understand the last time so I'm not optimistic that explaining it again will help. When you say that God is the greatest conceivable being, you're saying that God has all the good qualities. But goodness is a subjective judgement, so greatest possible being is a judgement made up of subjective judgements. For every subjective judgement that says X is a great making quality, there is an equally valid subjective judgement which says that X is a bad making quality. The reason is because qualities and properties are neither good or bad in and of themselves, they only become so when a subject attaches a value to them. You cannot construct a greatest anything out of properties that are inherently neutral. So "greatest conceivable being" has no meaning other than as a religious catchphrase.
As I pointed out in the other thread, you are changing the term 'greatest' to 'good and bad' so you can use it in a moral sense (and declare it incoherent) when GCB Theology uses it in a qualitative sense. It is greater to be omnipotent than not. It is greater to be omniscient than not. It is greater to be morally perfect than not.
