Christians, Prove Your God Is Good

[The Reality Salesman01]

. All it means is that goodness is understood as that aspect of things which humans judge to be satisfying of particular human hungers/appetites/desires (e.g. the hungers for food, survival, reproduction, community, justice, love, etc.). It is strictly about goodness.

Couldn't it be said that these things that we judge to be good, are entirely dependent upon our recognition that there are less desirable options? I'm not supporting moral relativism on a macro level, but with regard to conscious brain states, there are certainly some that are better than others, and each experience triggers one or another. If they were all the same, we wouldn't need descriptive concepts such as "good" or "bad"...right?

Human experience shows us that nothing in this universe seems to sate all of our desires.

Yes, but I think I would say that all things in the universe that are perceived to be good or bad, require a conscious mind to make them so. And the meaning of anything good can only have meaning by the recognition of something less desirable which we tend to recognize and describe as bad. But the two words seem entirely conceptual and do not seem to have any practical use beyond their descriptive application. A rotten egg and a rose both trigger different neurological responses. And it may be that there are some who prefer the response caused by a rotten egg, but this anomaly would not prevent us from making an accurate predictive model that shows us which one is commonly desired. And through research, we may even discover the cause of the anomaly. The subjective description of what each person experiences while smelling [edited to correct my typo] is useful when paired with the third person understanding of the underlying brain states which give rise to them. There seems to be no reason to believe that a similar model of morality cannot be understood in the same way. And while there may not be any single right answer to a moral question, there may be several. And by establishing answers that are good in principle, in comparison, there are several others that we can say are objectively wrong. All of this is entirely dependent whether or not we admit that the objective of our inquiry is to maximize the quality of conscious experience of creatures who are capable of possessing it. Give me an example of a question regarding good or bad that exists apart fro such beings, and I'll begin considering whether or not this "absolute good" is a coherent question. At the moment, I'm inclined to say that it is not.