Why do you not believe in God?

[Skepsis]

I have to disagree that we have to be able to rigorously define a word for it to have a concept of it.

We have words in order to convery meaning, to convey a cocept. A word is useless unless you can convery the concept. An undefined word is useless. If I were to call you a sharlfaldorp, what would you take that to mean?

When given two options regarding an assignment in university:

1) To be lazy and not do a good job and leave it for last day
2) To overcome lazinesss and do a good job and work on it early

I would say 2 is an action that is "Greater" then 1. Therefore whenever we can "overcome laziness", it's almost always better then "giving into laziness".

The reason you see this as better is because the outcome of being lazy is nearly always worse than that of being conscientous. However, the concept is NOT objective if there is an exception. It isn't objectively wrong to be lazy, because being lazy may have caused you to stay at home and avoid a fire at the university.

When giving two options given a wife:

1) Treating Wife well
2) Treating her bad

I would say 1 is greater then 2.

Treating people well in general is a greater then treating them bad.

When it comes to when people act like jerks, two options:

1) Forbear them/still love them
2) Hate them/be super angry at them.

I say option 1 is greater then option 2.

Generally, the former of either scenario is preferable. Generally.
This also depends on the person's definition of greatness- people can have a very warped sense of what is "greater" in reference to the treatment of themselves and others.
Druggies think it is "greater" to abuse chemicals for bodily satisfaction than not.
The Mafia thinks it is "greater" to crush the shins of back stabbers than not.

The question is how do we objectively measure this?

You have to first establish that greatness is in fact objective, otherwise you can't measure it objectively. Simple, really.

I believe in a metaphysical basis to greatness and that we are linked to it. In so far as we are closer to it in a perception to the basis, the more correct we are, but there is some things we almost all are correct in.

Why is there a basis that is needed if you have't proven that greatness is objective? The basis is personal, it seems to me.

This is not to say because I believe in metaphysical, I don't think there is chemicals or parts of brain associated with the feelings, no I believe there is connection between the brain and the metaphysical, so definitely I believe there will be chemicals and parts of brain associated with the feelings.

Bit of a run-on, don't you think?
Also, how is the brain connected to the metaphysical?

Heroic nature is greater then self-centered nature for example.
To believe in greatness however requires me to believe there is basis to all levels of greatness.
That basis to me, is God.

Like I said before, until you can prove greatness to be an objective principal, you can't prove the need for a basis other than yourself.
Dawkins parodied this, questioning why we don't need an ultimately smelly being as a basis for understanding bad smell.