But how many people self-deify? Why would you think personal, non-deontological moral values were a product of self-deification?
Wouldn't reality-based morals be more robust, and preferable to imaginary morals?
And if one's morality is strictly utilitarian, it shouldn't be claimed as God's will or universal.
Claim cited: "
Omnibenevolence doesn't follow from the existence of an infinite god."
OK. Explain how.
Now you're bringing in theoretical physics. Fascinating.
Till tomorrow, then.
Good morning. I posted that last night. When you objected requiring empirical evidence, I thought you were asking for empirical evidence of God? That was the only reason I replied the way I did.
Regarding self-deification? people do it everyday, all day, all the time. Just in very small ways, in acceptable ways.
Regarding utilitarian, I dont think anyone
needs to include God in the construct, but it helps. At least imagining it helps produce the general concept and facilitates making decisions in particular as needed. At the end of the day, humility is the antidote for almost all harmful actions. But, being too humble ... backfires. Using the "God's will" model produces the right balance which is not really a "balance" but is heavily skewed towards humility with exceptions.
To be clear my claim is not precisely/correctly stated above. It is:
In order for an absolutely infinite being ( God ) to create a world of material multiplicty, it must be omnibenevolent, not malevolent, not deist.
To justify ( prove? ) my claim. First I will eliminate the deist god as an option. Then I will produce the model using an absolutely infinite being which is choosing to be omnibenevolent. Then I will take the same model, flip the god into a malevolent being, and the entire construct collapses. This should justify and maybe prove that in order for this specific god concept to exist, it must be omnibenevolent.
Along the way, the root causes for evil actions will be determined. Reasons for their initial creation/existence will be produced. Reasons why these root causes cannot be... stifled or cut-off will be produced. The self-harm that naturally occurs when individuals engage in these harmful actions will be described. This is where the moral code comes from. It is, in a way "selfish", a person is discouraged from harming themself, and, there is also an incentive to be selfless, but not to be a martyr in all but the most extreme circumstances. So, it's essentially a selfish model, but selflessness is included.
The consequences of the "absolutley infinite" being "eternal" is what eliminiates the deist god concept as a possibility. If time is not "flowing" for it, if everything is concurrent, then, what would normally be scribed biblically as "creation" is not a sequence of events. It is better described in present-progressive "creating". It is an ongoing creation. And there are no steps, one after another after another. All of it is happening simultaneously. Because of this, what can be described
loosley as "God's will" cannot ever be interrupted. It is an ongoing, binary, intentional choice
to be creating. There cannot be a "clock-maker" god in this model. There is no "set-it and forget-it".
However, this does NOT mean that the combined root causes of evil actions are included in this ongoing creation in the same way as all other beneficial nurturing motivational forces. They are being produced counter-intuitivley via what is commonly referred to as "being cursed". This same continuous uninterrupted "divine will", for lack of better words, is continuously pushing away, and making "heavy" these root-causes in their combined state. It's when they are combined that produces the evil actions. Deconstructing, reapplying towards something constructive is one way to undermine these evil actions. But, if they are recombined unknowingly... poof. Back to square one and possibly worse off than ever.
