repetitive, or parallel? Is everything brought about by hazard and chaos, as so many persons think? If so, then it must be a very intelligent and creative hazard and chaotic force that are in command.
Lack of any proof, evidence, reference, index or even a solid argument for the presence of such a creator-programmer, man is faced with an unfathomable dilemma.
He finds himself, with all his ability to discover and to know, unable to answer the question and unable to find evidence for his convictions.
Confrontation between man and the universe leads to no evidence, none whatsoever, for a presumed programmer-creator. This sterility of thought forces him to coils back to his faculty of belief.
Lack of proof, or even any solid argument, man is obliged to resort to his personal convictions. Personal convictions are not better than any conjectural thinking. No scientific knowledge advances any evidence for such a creator-cause. Neither religion nor metaphysical thought or experience can provide for such evidence. Man remains standing in front the wall of the unknown. Like death and the limit of matter (the Wall of Max Planck), no one has any accessibility behind the wall.
At this very cross roads, where man is forced to recoil upon his faculty of belief, lack of proof for or against such causality, that man enters into the dilemma of conjecture. If any evidence could be produced either way the mankind would definitely belief or disbelief. But it is not so easy for evidence cannot be established.
At this point man is torn in between by the ‘fors and cons’.
Should he belief or disbelief in such a causality, or finality, whether internal or external, a creator-cause, a God, or not? This is the