There is always a running analogy between the material and moral.
You see this in the sage Jesus’ teaching. He constantly speaks about seeds, weeds, managers, servants, wine, bread, birth. But what he is trying to convey, to deliver via the material spoken about, is what he calls the kingdom of the god.
The kingdom of the god is the rule of the best. It is the rule of that toward which everything is headed said Aristotle when he argued that the divine was the final cause of all things. Aquinas, after being steeped in Aristotle, most effectively and emphatically expresses the theme of the analogy between the moral and material.
The human animal, being bodily, requires that meaning be embodied. The implication is that when the human animal speaks of the god the meaning is at best analogical. What meaning can the characteristics of omnipotence or omniscience have but something like power and knowledge as we understand them multiplied by infinity. You see what happened at the end? The finite (human) lost it in the infinite (divine).
This is why it is better to embody the divine than anything, and embodiment has greater and lesser in its achievement. Cheaper? Sayings. Sayings are easy and cheap. Saying like one ruled by that toward which everything is headed is easy. Fill your sounds with words like “good”, “just”, “fair”, “rational”, etc.
Still cheap but better than mere words? External rule following. Doing the right thing for the wrong reason. It is work to shape the body and its activity by deeper measure. But the body and its activity can be shaped in the right way for the wrong reason or motive. One could be good to get into heaven. But woe to he who seeks gold and shapes his behavior for its achievement. Heaven is like gold to too many.
Better, and I will not speak of best for that would imply contact. I will at best say that I recognizes a shaping that far outweighs external conformity but given that I am but a paltry artist and the shape by even my own measure is still deformed, I will merely point to better. It goes by different names-heart, soul, center. What is referenced is only analogically meaningful at best. It like the divine is beyond description. But, I will stab at it in words.
What rages inside each individual human (on average) is a fire of causality. It is self-conscious directedness. It is mere potential in the infant but by the age of ten it is in full bloom. It is a center of direction, a center of choice, a center of weighing and analyzing, going with and going without. I do not mean feeling. Feeling is some of the material formed by this center.
We do not yet know its full potential. By this I mean we hear tale of those who have done wonders, and the greatest of wonders may be unnoticed. It may indeed be that greatness is inversely proportional to visibility. This of course is true in each human. What is greatest is the fire of causality and the shaper who sends it forth. But you would spend a lifetime and more in the effort to verify (make visible) its reality. What goes by the name of “philosophy” has strains within it that have taken this task as primary and while discourse on the shaper of the fire of causality is not worthless, the discourse on verification is almost wholly.
Like discourse on the divine it is at best analogical. For Kant there were three transcendental ideas–ideas that we could not do without but that we could also not verify through that which depended on the reality of those ideas: God, soul and world. The infinite cause. The finite cause. The totality of material. Give meaning to infinite. Give meaning to causality (Hume is good here). Give meaning to totality.
But I dare you to do without. You will be able to in the cheapest and most superficial sense. But that you do without in the deepest and most meaningful sense is unverifiable which means that you will never be able to PROVE that you do without.