No, my point is that espousing [believing] a narrative is one thing, demonstrating how/why it is a frame of mind that all reasonable men and women are obligated to espouse [believe] another thing altogether.
For example, one can provide a narrative encompassing the history of Christianity. There are historical facts about it that one is more or less able to demonstrate as true. All reasonable men and women would seem obligated to believe this or that about it. Why? Because there are events that can be more or less established.
Instead, I shift the discussion [on this thread] to examining the narratives of those who do accept the Christian faith. And I ask them to embody that belief in/by/through connecting the dots between their behaviors on this side of the grave and their perceived fate on the other side. What here can be established such that reasonable men and women are obligated to concur?
Yes, but, again, look what is at stake here!!!
Your take [here and now] on God and religion has to eventually come to grips with the reality of death. Something will happen to us after we die. And the overwhelming preponderance of religious folks insist that all revolves around one or another rendition of Judgment Day.
You don’t believe that. But you offer absolutely no substantive reasons why others ought not to believe that too.
You merely point out that you have managed to “think” your way into believing this. And, in having done so, you are able to sustain a measure of psychological comfort and consolation.
Basically you are arguing that whatever your particular “subjective self” has manged to come up with is all that matters. If it “works” to bring you some measure of equanimity, you’re clearly better off.
And you won’t get any argument about that from me.
All I can do is to note this:
That until you are willing to intertwine a “general description” argument of this sort into an examination of actual human behaviors “out in the world” – a world where there are countless conflicting religious and secular narratives – you are content to just accept that what you believe “in your head” need be as far as you go.
That works for you. For all practical purposes.
Okay, but in a philosophy venue?