confrontation itself to face the enigma and ultimately face belief and disbelief.
The moral experience motivates the individual to take either side (Kant necessitates a God by moral need while Nietzsche rejects God denying any morality).
The spiritual experience. Here the spiritualist acknowledges finality while the non-spiritualist organicist rejects such finality and is contended with the atomistic-mechanicist-organic explanation.
The aesthetic experience where the individual realizes a state of aesthetical response of admiration leading to acknowledgement of a creator. The same phenomenon (a rose, a landscape) may produce in another individual a sense of admiration but does not lead him by necessity to believe in a creator.
A meditative state where the individual is an inseparable totality of these experiences can be experienced giving the confrontation between man and phenomenon a direct seizure of its presence and meaning, but always allowing the individual to choose between belief and disbelief. Buddhists for example use this ‘wholeness’ of man to meditate but in the final analysis reject the idea of the existence of a God. Other meditative persons like mystics, ascetics and Sufis acknowledge the existence of a God through meditation.
Then, life itself with its vicissitudes and opposite paradoxes: change, insecurity, good and bad, life and death, confronting all phenomena, offers man in his life journey to react favorably or unfavorably towards the idea of God.
It is worthwhile mentioning that if statistics are to be held half of world population can be classified as disbelievers and the other half nearly can be classified in the opposite category of believers.
Although influences of