(September 28, 2018 at 11:56 am)SteveII Wrote:(September 28, 2018 at 11:29 am)polymath257 Wrote: No, that was NOT my problem. In fact, if you are talking all properties of a person, it is very far from being obvious that there is a meaning for 'more or less' even for specific properties.
And the fact that I can imagine a thousand terms is *precisely* why you need to be more specific about *which* ones are being used to demonstrate the existence of a deity. Without more specifics, I cannot know why God cannot fear, or admire. Both bravery and respect seem to be very good qualities. So if God is maximally good, He should have both. The fact that this causes *you* problems is part of my claim that your whole argument is flawed.
Umm, bravery and respect are not possible for God to have. Possible was the very first concept brought up on this topic. There, imagined problem solved. Your entire last paragraph is about epistemology again and not ontology. We don't need to know what mix of properties is greater. You have failed over and over to even come close to illustrating your contention that is is not possible to a have a maximally great being. You only bring up confusion as to how would we know: epistemology--which is not a concern at all.
Really? Why is it not *possible* for God to have those properties? or are you assuming God has *other* properties that contradict those? Which is exactly my point: you have to pick and choose which properties you are wanting in a deity in order to show they are mutually consistent.
And *than* you* have to show a common maximum for all of the ones you choose it possible.
