And this Absolute Being has the "nature" of: the Good, Truth, Beauty, Justice, and Love — all of which are the very foundations, not only of the laws of nature, but of the moral law as well.
Just my "take" on tis matter, FWIW.
Well, that is my take, too, so you must be right. :-)
"man is the measure of all things."
Man being the measure of all things is what brings us dilemmas which are not. This "man-made" dilemma is the same as that brought forth by atheists who claim there was (or was not) existence prior to existence (what came before the big bang?) but deny the obvious - there is but One Eternal Existence and that is God and all things are included therein. Instead, they want "proof" while clinging doggedly to unprovable doctrines of their own.
I am reminded of Shakespeare's suggestion of "suspension of disbelief."
That magnificent artist certainly depended on the willing "suspension of disbelief" in order to conduct his business as a dramatist.
Dramatists work in the medium of human imagination, not in the medium of "matter in its motions."
The great dramatists do not construct "second realities." Instead, they explore the dynamics of "first reality," which is where human beings actually live.
But they do so imaginatively. And that is why the audience has to be willing to "suspend its disbelief" in order to hear what the dramatist is saying, "in the duration" of his play. Later, of course, the person in the audience is perfectly free to form his own impressions of the performance he has seen.
It wasn't Shakespeare who first thunk up the requirement of the "willing suspension of disbelief" as necessary to the experience of a dramatic performance, though he mightily benefited from it.
That was Aristotle, in the Poetics. To my mind, the Poetics is the great homage of a student to his teacher and colleague of some 27 years: Aristotle learned practically everything he knew about "poetics" from the example and practice of Plato....
IMHO FWIW.
It seems to me atheists have a lot of "man-made dilemmas" on their hands which are unresolvable in principle, on the basis of their "principles."
They "live" in a flat, horizontal, linear world that moves inexorably and irreversibly from past to present to future — and then you die. All is nothing in the end. There is no meaning to existence. Unless you are a philosophical existentialist; and then you either have to cobble together a meaning of your own, or just plain commit suicide.
Yet what Socrates/Plato say is that man cannot "bootstrap himself" out of this problem by his own efforts. For man has a "vertical" extension, not just a "horizontal" one. The vertical extension moves in the eternal; the horizontal, in time....
Thus "man lives at the intersection of time and timelessness."
Progress along the horizontal does not yield meaning. It is mere plodding existence, available to any biological animal.
It is the vertical ascent which describes what makes man distinctive among all the other biological organisms. The vertical ascent is what is needed for human nature to express its full significance and meaning.
The atheists' problem is they rule out the "vertical ascent" as a matter of adamantine principle....
Well, just some stray thoughts, dear Mind-numbed Robot, my brother in Christ!
Thank you so very much for weighing in here....