Sigh you were doing so well Astargath.

Yes you can posit anything and in isolation and this may be a logical belief. However, beliefs do not exist in isolation. They are tested against other beliefs and the world itself.

If for example I was blind and had never seen the color of the sky and no one had told me what color it was. I could say that I believe the sky is green because when I had inquired in the past that was the most common color of things outside.

Now this belief is false but at this stage it is logical. The belief will fail, however, when it is tested because the color of the sky can be known and defined within our system of knowledge. If I ask someone who is not blind what color the sky is or build a machine to measure the wavelengths of light in the sky both will return the answer blue. Belief that the sky is green while initially logical fails and is disproven as we grow in knowledge.

What Perry Marshall shows is that there are some beliefs that cannot fail in this way.

This does not "prove" or "disprove" these beliefs it simply shows us that for some questions we must infer knowledge rather then prove it. Such knowledge must be accepted apriori. This is a logical necessity of an incomplete universe.

Perry Marshall's conclusion follows from his primary assumptions but most people with a background in philosophy or epistemology will acknowledge this and there are other ways of arriving at the same conclusion.

For example we had that guy nihilnegativum here a while back who was a hardcore nihilist with a clear background in philosophy.



What both nihilnegativum and Perry Marshall are telling us is that both theism and nihilism are logical positions. It is only the atheist who keeps asking for proof and refusing to define his own basis in knowledge who is behaving illogically because he is repeatedly asking the wrong questions.

This makes traditional atheism easy to dismiss as a credible position. Nihilism on the other hand is a much tougher nut to crack for nihilism is a logical system. To reject nihilism The best course of action is probably to build out a theist world view alongside the worldview of the nihilist and honestly ask yourself which of these constitutes your reality. Thus Perry Marshall's argument or nihilnegativum's if you prefer to start from a position of nihilism is only the first step in an argument for religion.

P.S.
If God was truly made up by primitive people thousands of years ago then it should be a trivial matter to disprove him just like the blind man can disprove that the sky is green. The fact that we not only cannot disprove God but in all probability will never disprove God hints that this is something much deeper and more fundamental.

P.P.S
You have not disproven Perry Marshall's three assumptions but if you think you can have at it. They are:

1) That the universe is finite
2) That the universe is rational
3) That the question of God cannot be answered from within the system.