What a thought-provoking statement! Let’s break it down and explore the ideas behind it.

The statement argues that the notion that humans can achieve ultimate happiness and fulfillment through naturalistic means (i.e., without relying on supernatural or religious beliefs) is flawed. This perspective suggests that human nature has inherent limitations that cannot be overcome solely through human effort, and that a divine moral framework is necessary to provide guidance and direction.

The first part of the statement raises an important question: Can humans truly achieve ultimate happiness and fulfillment on their own? Some might argue that, with enough effort and resources, individuals can create their own happiness and meaning in life. However, others might counter that human nature is inherently flawed and prone to selfishness, greed, and other vices that prevent us from achieving true fulfillment without some sort of external guidance or moral framework.

The second part of the statement suggests that the desire for independence and rejection of a divine creator is often driven by pride. This is an interesting point, as it implies that individuals who advocate for naturalistic means of achieving happiness may be motivated by a desire to assert their autonomy and self-sufficiency, rather than acknowledging their limitations and potential need for external guidance.

There are several implications to consider here:

1. Limitations of human nature: If humans do have inherent limitations that prevent us from achieving ultimate happiness and fulfillment on our own, then it’s possible that we require some sort of external guidance or moral framework to help us overcome these limitations.
2. Role of divine morality: The statement implies that a divine moral framework is necessary for providing direction and guidance in achieving true happiness and fulfillment. This raises questions about the nature of morality and whether it can be derived from human reason alone, or if it requires some sort of supernatural or religious foundation.
3. Pride and independence: If pride and the desire for independence are driving factors behind the rejection of a divine creator, then this suggests that individuals may need to confront their own biases and motivations in order to consider alternative perspectives.

Overall, this statement encourages us to think critically about the nature of human happiness and fulfillment, as well as our relationship with morality and the concept of a divine creator. By examining these ideas, we can gain a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us.