Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProfessorPlum

(11,385 posts)
9. assumes facts not in evidence
Fri Aug 28, 2015, 07:57 AM
Aug 2015

1) the existence of god or gods
2) the existences of that god or gods' moralities
3) that god or gods' "superiority".

what I am talking about is not god, but the story about god that people tell themselves in their heads (which may or may not be shaped by other peoples' stories). Those stories definitely exist for a lot of people.

So, if you agree with the morality of the stories you tell yourself, then you really don't need a god. If you disagree with them, then you are taught to _assume_ your own morality is inferior - but on what basis? If your stories feature a morality that is greater than your own, then isn't that a morality that you can conceive of - and therefore, is your own morality? In other words, the greatest morality that you can conceive of or imagine is actually the truest version of your own morality.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I always found it interesting... uriel1972 Aug 2015 #1
that's really a funny coincidence, isn't it ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #3
But isn't that why there are so many religions, Curmudgeoness Aug 2015 #2
Thanks. I hope I can bring some other people along that road faster than I got there ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #4
I am not sure that there is a fast lane Curmudgeoness Aug 2015 #5
I agree. And I think what you are doing is great ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #7
Religion is ego driven AlbertCat Aug 2015 #6
Your reasoning is wrong. DetlefK Aug 2015 #8
assumes facts not in evidence ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #9
Understanding is not necessary for belief. DetlefK Aug 2015 #10
"the premise that the god exists only in the head of the believer" ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #13
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Then your proof is entirely useless and pointless. DetlefK Aug 2015 #17
don't pull something ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #18
If you make up a god, of course it has your morals. DetlefK Sep 2015 #21
what I'm saying holds whether you make up the god or somebody else does ProfessorPlum Sep 2015 #22
For example, the group construction "Yahweh" is said to think slavery is ok ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #20
Why do you assume that a hypothetical god would necessarily be morally superior? LiberalAndProud Aug 2015 #12
he is assuming that gods are superior in all aspects Warren Stupidity Aug 2015 #19
I always had a hard time with Plato RussBLib Aug 2015 #11
that's also a persuasive argument :) ProfessorPlum Aug 2015 #14
That was how I made the leap from belief to non-belief. Curmudgeoness Aug 2015 #15
You're not alone with Plato. onager Aug 2015 #16
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Atheists & Agnostics»Either you agree with god...»Reply #9