For those who still can't get what I'm on about, here is a good summary:
1) Theist asserts that without God existing, no one can have an objective purpose (i.e an ultimate, absolute goal/meaning for existing).
2) Theist says that beings only has an objective purpose if and only if a higher being with objective purpose imbues them with such, and thus we can't grant each other or ourselves objective purpose in life.
3) My contention, demonstrated by my first argument, is that even an objective purpose has to be chosen by the agent(s) in question as such, which is a value judgement.
4) God is the greatest being conceivable by definition, and thus can't have been granted objective purpose because there is no possible higher being.
5) Given 2), God cannot give himself the objective purpose he lacks.
6) Since beings without objective purpose (which includes God) cannot grant others (us) with objective purpose, even on a theistic worldview the idea of objective purpose is nonsensical.
Something like that.
1) Theist asserts that without God existing, no one can have an objective purpose (i.e an ultimate, absolute goal/meaning for existing).
2) Theist says that beings only has an objective purpose if and only if a higher being with objective purpose imbues them with such, and thus we can't grant each other or ourselves objective purpose in life.
3) My contention, demonstrated by my first argument, is that even an objective purpose has to be chosen by the agent(s) in question as such, which is a value judgement.
4) God is the greatest being conceivable by definition, and thus can't have been granted objective purpose because there is no possible higher being.
5) Given 2), God cannot give himself the objective purpose he lacks.
6) Since beings without objective purpose (which includes God) cannot grant others (us) with objective purpose, even on a theistic worldview the idea of objective purpose is nonsensical.
Something like that.
