(January 7, 2015 at 2:02 am)MysticKnight Wrote: I think if you believe in objective greatness, you automatically will believe in God. But Atheists will say greatness is all subjective or that there is no connection between objective greatness and God.
I think if you believe there is objective greatness, you will have to believe all possible greatness has an existence and origin and basis that by which we experience objective greatness. I think relative experience of greatness relies on objective greatness existing as well.
I don't believe in objective greatness (by virtue of it being an incoherent concept), so I suppose I can just reject this premise on first principles. That being said, if I don't, how would this in any way indicate God? You haven't proven a link between "objective greatness" and an "origin of greatness", and you certainly haven't proven that the origin is God.
This looks like a god of the gaps argument obfuscated by word salad.
(January 7, 2015 at 2:02 am)MysticKnight Wrote: To say one subjective experience of greatness is better or worse then another relies on some objective reality of greatness.
I don't understand how you get to this point. "Greatness" is a relative term. A given amount of money could be "great" to one person and not to another. I don't see how one person evaluating it as "great" has to hint that there must be some objective way to measure greatness.
The fact that the other person can look at that sum of money and not consider it great seems to shoot the notion of "objective greatness" in the foot, doesn't it?
(January 7, 2015 at 2:02 am)MysticKnight Wrote: But such arguments are not knock out arguments. But I still believe this a good reason to believe in God.
Why? If by your own admission it's not a strong argument, why would it be a good reason to believe?
