its way for an explanation. Lack of evidence becomes the pivot of the attitude of men. Any evidence, for or against the existence of a designer-cause, annuls immediately any belief system.
The argument of the existence of the universe vis-à-vis the non existence of the universe as a comparative-contrastive index appeals to reason by begging the question. The nihilist, the skeptic, and the one who doubts, as well as the agnostic, can reduce this argument to nullity. All depends which side the individual has chosen.
Through the enigmatic presence of the universe and man we seem to be in perpetual lack of knowledge.
Our present knowledge is suspended as ever between these two enigmas. In this respect, we do not consider as valid the assumption of Jacques Monot of using the term ‘teleonomy’ to denote ‘non-intentional finality characterizing the integrated functioning of biological unit’.
It is a contradiction in terms, since hazard is present as alternative. Therefore; if, and only if, hazard is the cause of finality, even if finality is non intentional, it seizes to be hazard. It becomes calculating intelligence of decisive control leading to order. Mechanical causality explains the mechanism of relations without attempting to explain the instigating factor of such causality, nor of the nature of force of its assumed control, of the animated aspect. If the auto-mechanism is considered as the instigating factor for the universe, it remains to explain the instigating factor itself.
Can we explain phenomena by mechanical causality only, if we demand for the ‘how’, particularly, in explaining biological phenomena? A man, or a lizard, cannot be a mechanical robot and a tree as well cannot only be a productive
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24