Attributes, Probability and the God Index

[FallentoReason]

Wouldn't this assume that all indexes from zero to one were equally likely?

Yes.

It would seem obvious that more beings lower on the scale would exist, but I'm not sure how one would calculate these probabilities (or if it is even possible to do so).

If we somehow managed to narrow it down and say only being from .25 to .5 would be the most possible, we still have an infinite amount.

The theist can only say that a certain mix of attributes is the necessary amount for this [so called] necessary being. That's a different topic altogether, but it ends with the theist trying to explain why God arbitrarily has those values and not others and why they were the necessary values and not others if nothing exterior to God motivated God to have needed those exact values and not others in the first place.

---

Wouldn't this assume that all indexes from zero to one were equally likely? It would seem obvious that more beings lower on the scale would exist, but I'm not sure how one would calculate these probabilities (or if it is even possible to do so).

This perception is that of lower beings, who are the playthings of the higher beings, who probably don't know many of the even higher beings.

Just think: if logic itself is a construct... and only applicable here... why can't there be an infinite number of beyond maximal-power beings?

Ah, the ontological argument.. sort of.

The fallacy with that is that a concept in our head is different to an object in the real world. I can think of a stapler, but that concept in my head isn't an actual stapler (because that would hurt!). Therefore these all-powerful beings that we can imagine to exist are just concepts and in no way does that entail they actually exist.