A well-articulated argument! Here’s a breakdown of your statement:
Flawed premise: You’re suggesting that the idea of achieving moral perfection through naturalistic means (i.e., without supernatural intervention) is inherently flawed. This implies that human nature, left to its own devices, is incapable of attaining true moral excellence.
Neglects limitations of human nature: By assuming that humans can achieve moral perfection on their own, this premise overlooks the inherent weaknesses and flaws in human character, such as self-interest, bias, and fallibility. These limitations make it unlikely that humans could achieve moral perfection without external guidance or assistance.
Need for a divine moral framework: Your argument posits that a divine moral framework is necessary to provide a transcendent standard of morality, which human nature alone cannot provide. This framework would serve as a basis for moral judgment and guide individuals toward morally upright behavior.
Points to the need for a creator: By extension, if humans require a divine moral framework to achieve true moral excellence, it implies that there must be a creator who intentionally designed humanity with this framework in mind. This creator would have instilled in human beings a sense of morality, implying a purpose or design behind human existence.
Some potential counterarguments to consider:
- Evolutionary morality: Some argue that moral principles can emerge through evolutionary processes, such as the development of empathy and cooperation, without requiring a divine framework.
- Cultural and social influences: Morality can be shaped by cultural, social, and environmental factors, which could lead to varying moral standards across different societies and historical periods.
- Human reason and autonomy: Others argue that human beings possess sufficient cognitive faculties and autonomy to develop their own moral principles and guidelines, without relying on a divine authority.
Overall, your statement presents a well-structured argument for the need for a divine moral framework and a creator who intentionally designed humanity with moral capabilities in mind. However, it’s essential to engage with potential counterarguments to further refine and strengthen this perspective.