Morality, Justice, Greatness - do these things prove God?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Just trying to stay on topic, Rhythm. I'm not offering a proof of god. I only wanted to show what sources of morality are available to an atheist versus that of a theist. If God is the source then, yes, the burden of proof is on the theist to defend the basis of their judgments. If the atheist is right, then might does make right.

[The Grand Nudger]

Mystic is. I'm an atheist, I don't think might makes right, but I don't think that our morality is so tied to the hip with "right" in the first place. My atheism has nothing to do with it either way. Similarly, the potential sources of morality are identical for either of us.

[Mystic]

Rhythm, I don't think morality has to be proven to be not a delusion, for most people. I understand there is moral nihilist.

In my first thread here, I stated I believe I know God in a properly basic way. Therefore there doesn't need to be an argument for God.

I believe the same is true of morality. Morality is not a fairy tale, but properly basic knowledge. However, I have an argument that seems compelling to me that morality is real.

1. Morality proves an Eternal Source, if morality is real (this the argument in the thread..so I don't need to go into details)

2. f morality was not real, we cannot know morality being real proves there is eternal source

If we accept we know premise 1, then premise 2 follows both morality and God is real.

Now as for premise 2, it needs to be argued for a little bit. But it seems if morality was a delusion, we would not know that it must be based on an eternal source, because our knowledge of it would be a delusion. If it was a delusion, to me, it seems we would not know what it takes for it to be objective. If morality was a delusion, it seems to be, we would not know what it takes to make it a non-delusion.

Rather on reflection, it seems our knowledge of it, knows for it to be true is linked to a Divine Higher Universal Reality. This knowledge doesn't seem to make sense if that wasn't reality.

Of course, when it comes to metaphysical truths, there needs to be some sort of inner intuition.

[Neo-Scholastic]

You're right, Mystic is asking if morality proves the existence of God. I would say no. But I would say that a morality professing intrinsic good or evil requires a God. If its all just matter of opinion, then it's only a matter of who has the power to force their opinion onto others.

[The Grand Nudger]

Which is exactly what it appears to be Chad.

Morality does not have to be proven Mystic, we have such a concept, we try to align ourselves to such a thing. What does have to be proven (if you would like for this to somehow prove whatever god you've imagined) is that it's more than a pleasant fiction that we have created/and or is hardwired because it is useful to us. Which, again, is exactly what it seems to be.

[Mystic]

What I mean by it being real, is that it is not a delusion or pleasant fiction as you said.

---

You can replace when I say "morality" with "objective morality". Of course if it's all subjective, then to me, basically morality is a delusion and a fake authority we put upon ourselves.

[The Grand Nudger]

Your if is showing. Unless you can show that objective morality actually exists, then a pleasant fiction it will remain. Just because you feel comfortable basing your conclusions on bare assertions doesn't mean that I do.

Essentially, your argument is this. I cannot prove A, but I do not wish to believe in the negation of A, therefore A proves B.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Mystic, calling something "real" opens up the discussion to ontology which is probably not the most fruitful line of inquiry. You can get there but it's a long slog. Were it me, I would go for "veracity." Moral judgments are truth claims. I have to go with Rhythm on this one. Morality does not prove God, rather God proves morality.

[The Grand Nudger]

LOL< he's safe with me Chad, I never go the "what is "real" anyway...fap fap fap" route.

[Mystic]

It's more like

(A -> B)= C (C is the premise that A implies B)
If not A, then C is not true. (argued for that)
C is true.
Therefore A is true.
Therefore B is true.