More seriously, the whole approach is Platonic. The Good is some perfection that we compare imperfect concretes to. Concretes are good insofar as they resemble this perfection. But whereas Plato saw the Good as an other-worldly abstractions, religionists see it as an other-worldly concrete. This approach defines out of existence an Aristotelian approach, where the good is not some abstract perfection, but an abstract standard we use to guide us in the achievement of a rational ultimate value. That's the approach I take here: earthlyidealism.com/p/solvin…

Step 1: Define the good as God Step 2: Declare that atheists must by definition reject the good Cute.