> It doesn't make it a good theory that you can come up with an even more ridiculous theory.
But in that context "Gods talking to him" isn't the "more ridiculous theory" we came up with after, it was the original theory. Just like this:
> but can you explain Achilles literally fighting a river-God and winning
Doesn't make it "more plausible" for gods and deities to be involved. That "river-God" could have been any numbers of dangerous aquatic animals, which would be way more plausible than arguing "He fought an actual river god!".
I realize I'm ruffling a lot of theist feathers here, but any explanation that involves the "supernatural" should automatically be considered rather implausible, especially when there are much more plausible alternatives that do not involve the supernatural at all.
But in that context "Gods talking to him" isn't the "more ridiculous theory" we came up with after, it was the original theory. Just like this:
> but can you explain Achilles literally fighting a river-God and winning
Doesn't make it "more plausible" for gods and deities to be involved. That "river-God" could have been any numbers of dangerous aquatic animals, which would be way more plausible than arguing "He fought an actual river god!".
I realize I'm ruffling a lot of theist feathers here, but any explanation that involves the "supernatural" should automatically be considered rather implausible, especially when there are much more plausible alternatives that do not involve the supernatural at all.