Conclusive Arguments For The Existence Of God
I don’t think that everyone blindly believes in their conclusions first and then looks for the supporting evidence, however, there are such people in both camps. The last paragraph of my previous response sums up your question regarding the burden of proof. The scientific method works well in applied sciences. Theoretical sciences, however, are more philosophically inclined until a time that something can become testable, at which time it really morphs into the applied field anyway. Scientists are also human beings just like the rest of us and are bound to view things in the context of their own prior experiences, education, beliefs, societal norms, peer pressure, etc. It is worth noting that not all scientists are atheists. In fact, according to the last survey in this regard, which I believe was conducted in 2015, about half of the scientists indicated that they believed in some form of a deity. In conclusion, I would like to say that I don’t view this debate as science versus religion. Up until recently most scientists and natural philosophers used to be theists. In fact, it won’t be an exaggeration to say that theists have contributed significantly more to the field of science, and continue to do so, than anyone else. The learned scientists of our times who know the history well do recognize and appreciate this fact. It might be useful to note that I have used the word theist here to include everyone who believes in some form of an unexplainable conscious intelligent power.
Yes, in summary, our logical inference is based upon the observation of this universe as a whole and a logical inference that it must have a Creator. There is nothing in our knowledge that comes into existence by itself, especially anything functional with precise laws, beauty, order, etc. This logical inference has been verified by a long list of human beings (Prophets) throughout the history of mankind who were selected by the Creator to communicate with and deliver us His message. Through circumstantial evidence we know that those human beings were truthful. Also the message that they delivered is precisely in accordance with our own natural disposition (fitrah), so we inherently know that it is true. Contrary to ignorant claims, in scientific terms this is very much a falsifiable theory. For example, it can be shown that the Prophets did not exist, or that they were not truthful, or that the existence of the universe has an alternate explanation. In the entire history of mankind, an enormous amount of effort has gone into falsifying God through various means, but thus far, other than wild speculations, there is nothing concrete to show.