(November 17, 2011 at 11:43 am)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: You don't have an argument then.
I disagree. For example, morality being real, can be disputed, but I think you still can know it's real. It needing an eternal basis can be disputed but a lot of people agree upon this premise. Everything else flows from that. So while these two premises can be disputed, it's still a good argument, because it's a plausible argument. The premises seem to be true for a lot of people. A lot of people feel there needs to God for morality to be real. William Lane Craig argues with the moral argument for example, and people take it seriously.
I think it's better then the standard moral argument, because God is just stated to be needed for morality with no argument to show why. What's really being said is there needs to be an eternal metaphysical basis to morality. But then I further argue morality encompasses infinite levels and an Ultimate level and there needs to be basis for that. The basis must have comprehensive knowledge of Ultimate morality and infinite levels of moral greatness, which only an Ultimate Existence can have.
Although you may not agree with the moral argument, I've seen atheists agree upon the premise, for it to objective as opposed to relative there needs to be God. They then say morality is subjective and argue for that.
A lot of people intuitively believe morality needs eternal basis, which is why they always wonder what morals atheists believe in and find authoritative, if they don't believe in God.
So while you may dispute these premises, it still makes for a good argument to many people, whom will agree with those premises.
At the end, I don't think naturalism can account for morality, and I find this personally to be strong argument for myself, because I find the premises intuitively true.
The other argument about greatness, I didn't go into discussion, but I thought about it myself, and while some greatness doesn't seem to need eternal basis, there is a lot of greatness that to me obviously needs eternal basis, or you can argue, as I've heard others say, there is no such thing as greatness, it's all relative subjective opinion, there is nothing great or non-great. When talking about what is Ultimately Great for example, there needs to be eternal basis to that knowledge.
I personally think this a good argument. The thought experiment I showed for morality needing eternal basis also seems to be a strong indication of the premise.
