INTRODUCTION / EPISTEMOLOGY OF BELIEF
Belief is used in two senses in the discussions of epistemology. The general definition “being committed to a thought heartily” is not sufficient for psychological interpretations.
It is better to call being committed to a thought without considering whether that thought is real or not as “myth” instead of belief. It is better to define belief as believing in an abstract concept through reasoning without perceiving with five senses.
If man believes in something that he is committed to heartily without whether it really exists or not or whether it is ethically appropriate or not, it is weak belief (myth). Thoughts that are approved and accepted by the heart as a result of reasoning have a more permanent base when they turn to belief.
Myths are models of believing originating from the need for a concrete being rather than the existence of it. Inferences formed as a result of reasoning should be evaluated as approved premises scientifically. A person who doubts whether what he believes is real or not cannot obtained the expected result in psychological dynamics due to the lack of internal approval. Myths that are not approved by free will are generally permanent.
The discussions of the reality of the invisible or the transcendental reality is one of the most important areas of interest of the people who deal with positive sciences recently. In the past, the knowledge that could be tried and tested was regarded as real; today, the scientists who believe that there is an invisible order have started to define the invisible as real today.
It is difficult to explain the secrets of the universe through five senses. Therefore, man tries to reach the realities through different channels. The first way that takes man to realities is experiment-observation/empiric approach. This method is in the area of interest of neuropsychiatry and positive science. The second way is reasoning. It in is in the area of interest of theoretical, positive science and religious science, social sciences and psychiatry. The third way to the reality is intuition and instincts; they are in the area of interest of neuropsychiatry apart from religious science. Those studying the brain made the first and third ways to intersect by using the method of trial and error on the relationship between brain screening and feelings. The fourth way is belief. This method is used for the unexplainable points by the other three methods on the way to reality. Today, neuropsychology is also interested in the issues of belief, sincerity and intention. As it is seen, all of the ways for the scientists who are trying to seek the reality can be used without being contrary to basic scientific principles.
With a general definition, religious life means to believe that there is an invisible order along with the visible one in the universe and to try to live harmoniously with this order. It is difficult for man to believe in something that he cannot see because man perceives the universe through five senses. Perception outside five senses is not usually a conscious perception and it necessitates special effort. Religious life is the development of ethical practices and psychological attitudes on such a belief.
The second perception mechanism of man outside five senses is the mental brain. Marsel Mesulam, who is one of the prominent neuroscientists and who is a cognitive neuroscientist, says that 90% of the human operated brain feelings, thoughts and attitudes, and that operations related to five senses account for only 10%.
Our organ which we can call mental brain (mind) in short does different things in other beings than in man. For instance, it was determined that human brain has a meaningfulness talent that can perceive time and that it has magnetic sensibility. It produces abstract thought along with concrete thought. It has a structure that determines aims and that programs power and energy. When it times and sorts, it can choose wishes and motives, too. It produces about 50-100 thousand thoughts; it can add feelings to those thoughts and form reactions, too. When it makes decisions, it takes into consideration social and emotional dimensions, too. It is also the work of the human brain to use symbols a lot and develop new concepts in the phase of producing thoughts.
Five senses are sufficient for eating, drinking, sheltering and reproducing but producing civilization, reasoning, judging, dominating the universe, producing humanitarian values, being in a philosophical pursuit and believing in sacred things cannot be explained sufficiently by those senses.
Man’s psychological needs, desires and targets are limitless but what he can perceive and dominate through five senses are very limited. To dominate the universe, to live eternally, to be aware of death but not to be afraid of it are typical desires of an average person. Man can be defeated by a virus though he has such big desires relating to the future and he has psychological needs to be met. It is ironical that man wants to dominate nature but he cannot control his blood pressure and heartbeat.
Here, we can see that the mind has some abstract need along with basic needs like eating, drinking, sheltering and reproducing, which are also present in other living beings. What will happen if there is a need but that need is not met? If you do not meet your need for food, your blood glucose level will fall and you will be ill. Similarly, when we do not meet our emotional needs, our mental health will deteriorate. If we do not overcome our fears, we will not feel secure. The need for believing in the sacred becomes important just at this point. If the needs are not met, the brain can search for different solutions with the feelings of fear, weakness and helplessness. Breakdowns can occur in the structure of the brain that produces abstract thoughts when it is left defenseless against mental diseases. Man who perceives the past and the future has difficulty in putting up with uncertainty.
The abstract objects that the brain produces are abstract scientific coefficients like knowing everything, being eternal, sharing justly, being equipped with love, showing mercy, being absolute, that is, limitless, living freely and controlling everything. Believing in the sacred is also included in the scientific coefficients, that is, abstract objects, and they facilitate ensuring security for man in the balance of abstract thinking. In other words, there is a limitless source that grants justice, truthfulness and power. A person who believes in the sacred by thinking, “There is a protective power that has power over all things, knows everything, has a limitless power, hears me, understand what I think and knows me better than I do; this power protects me”, puts his spirit in a mental shelter and becomes tranquil. To believe in the sacred gives man security and consolation when he feels weak and insufficient at the situations in nature that he cannot control. The consolation power of religion steps in here.
The power of religion to add meaning to life is equivalent to the state of producing solutions to death. The only living being that is aware of his existence and knows that he will die is man. Fear of death is a fear that determines man’s behavior. A person who thinks that he will disappear after death also thinks that he came into being coincidentally. A person who has such a thought has the fear of losing what he has. If he does not believe in the Creator, he does not have the feeling of rendering account and becomes an egoist. He starts to consume his wealth by thinking, “I have come to this world only once; life is temporary; everything is meaningless.” A person who regards life as meaningless does not have a reason for living and turns his back on social contribution.
Issues related to religion and freedom sometimes arouse the following questions: Can a person feel both free and to have surrendered to the existence of the Creator? Is it possible for him to make plans thinking that he is immortal? How are the acts of a person who believes that nature came into being as a result of a special design formed? Immanuel Kant defined believing that a series of objects really exist though there is no concrete information as a mental phenomenon. Kant says that this state is like the magnetic capacity of an iron object that we cannot touch and see, and that this capacity determines our various attitudes and tendencies. We cannot define the magnetic capacity of the iron object concretely but we can explain its effects in all fields of our life visibly. This explanation of Immanuel Kant is the effort of explaining the relationship between our ethical life and “mental phenomena” and “mental ideas”.
All objects float in the universe of wider and more abstract objects than themselves. Concrete objects become meaningful in the abstract universe. The meaning dimension of matter is the dimension of the universe that is heavenly and abstract. Abstract ideas and concepts like goodness, beauty, meaningfulness, equality, eternity, loving, treating people justly, being helpful, being merciful become meaningful when they are together with the abstract universe.
The background of matter is its dimension of meaning. Abstract concepts add meaning to concrete phenomena. We form everything that we know, every object with abstract concepts. Abstract and symbolic thought reveal the real “nature” of everything.
Our emotional attitudes regarding concrete objects like to love, to hate, to adopt, to want or to refuse are all abstract concepts. The fact that our mind is determined by those abstract concepts is one of the basic realities of the state of humanity. Man who notices the balance between the concrete, that is material, universe and the abstract universe, which is related to the meaning, and who tries to maintain it will reach the truth. Concrete universe is the universe at vegetal and animal level. Abstract universe is the universe at human dimension.
According to Darwin and Freud, humans and insects are the same. According to this, thought, man is a living being that came into existence coincidentally, that acts based on his instincts, that has no aim other than eating and reproducing, that is egoistic, that pursues his own interests and that can survive if he is strong. This view proposes a model of man that disappears after death, has no responsibility of accounting to anybody, practices love and sexuality equivalently, is irresponsible free and independent, and pursues his desires. Although these thoughts that form the philosophy of secular humanism sound nice, today modernism found out how appropriate they for the interests of man through trying them.
According to heavenly doctrines, the element that makes man real man is to live for the sake of a lofty and sacred purpose, and the meaning he bears. What makes a book a book is not ink and paper but the meaning and information in it and its capacity to enlighten the future; similarly, the value of man is hidden in his aim. When we think of the universe as a book, positive sciences are interested in the ink and paper of the book; heavenly knowledge denotes the meaning of the book. God is a sacred consciousness that created the universe out of nothing, has power over all things, has endless knowledge and power, limitless will and wisdom, is absolute giver of life, regulates and balances, and that cannot be included in the dimension of matter and time. Different evaluations regarding God’s attributes bring out religions. Such a God created man in a very special way and in a way that He can address him. The value of an antique object is one lira at an ironsmith’s but one thousand lira at an antique shop. What makes that object valuable is its relation and the sematic value it bears. What makes man valuable is his connection, relation and the dimension of meaning that it bears. Value originates from the one that is valuable. When the virtues that the Creator sets forth are in parallel with human knowledge, man can ascend to the rank of “the most honorable creature”. In order to attain this rank, man needs to know that he is a slave and try to obey God. Man is free but he is tested whether he knows the boundary between the rules of the universe and his own freedom. Therefore, the expression, “to know oneself is to know one’s Lord” is one of the expressions that explain the philosophy of the Quran.
Plato says that the beauties that are present in the world are used as a step to reach the idea of abstract beauty in the working system of the universe. In the journey to reach beauty, man calls various forms “beautiful”. Thus, he moves to true deeds from true forms. He reaches true ideas from true deeds, and true beauty from true ideas. In the end, he understands what the essence of the beauty is. Therefore, those who fall in love with imaginary beauty are called platonic lovers. Platonist view holds the idea that the spiritual structure of the universe and the divine system are worth worshipping.
Today, due to the denial of a system worth worshipping, we see some churches that have no God. Such a thought brings about worldly religious currents and sanctification of the system in the universe. The science circles of the 19th and 20th centuries sanctified science so much that they replaced religion with science.
A reality that is defined as invisible reality or transcendental reality is related to man’s intuition of “something there”. Since it cannot be proved scientifically that there can be more than one god, the feeling of “something there” convinces man that there needs to be a creator. A reality that can be understood through religious concepts is mentioned though it is too far away to be imagined and cannot be defined.
For instance, the sun is an object that is seen in the balance of matter and energy. Allah can also be defined as energy and abstract object. The thought that we cannot touch the Creator though He is near and in us with His attributes corresponds to the belief of oneness in the Quran. At this point, the theological view of Nursi, an Islamic scholar, stating that we can always feel Allah with His 99 names and with the attributes defined by them is significant as an explanatory view of the mysteries of the universe.
The definition of “mystic experience” is technically used for short-lived experiences. Basically, it is state of being entranced for a few hours. During a mystic experience, some people are in a mood as if they feel that the boundaries of personality disappear, that all of their desires are met and that their needs are met. Some people may hallucinate. Perceptions related to five senses like the following are words that express mystic experiences: “I feel as if I have been reborn; I feel as if I am surrounded by a pre-eternal and post-eternal power. To doubt His existence there was more difficult than doubting my own existence. His reality was more dominant than mine. My spirit is in perfect harmony with that power. I feel as if I am beyond stars; I feel all of the beauty, love, sorrow and enticement. I am experiencing a manifestation; I saw a bright light; it is saying to me, ‘Come. Love me.” Somebody came from inside the wall and touched me; so, excitement formed in me. I saw a dark figure.”
The person was interpreting hallucinating experience as the revelation of the divine being. Being surrounded by terrifying undefinable beings, having an evil feeling, the feeling of being followed and being controlled by magical beings, the thought of the existence of some people who read one’s mind are all hallucinations or illusions that have positive or negative effects.
The idea of the scientists who researched in this field defending the old view was that these mystic experiences do not have an organic foundation. Professor Flournoy in Geneva quoted his friend who had the talent of involuntary writing as follows: “Whenever I start to write automatically, I feel that it does not originate from subconscious. I perceive the existence of a strange being outside my body. It is difficult even to define this impression but it is so explicit that I can show its exact place.” Were these experiences objectivized and externalized ideas or did they express the change of our perceptions by invisible reality? It is very difficult to answer this question as yes or no within the framework of scientific principles. While the materialistic view says it is a mental phenomenon, the view of the divine perspective is that even if it is a mental phenomenon, it cannot move out of divine will.
The perception of reality is a part of mental work. In illnesses like schizophrenia, a person believes in hallucinations and forms illusions because the perception of boundaries between imagination and reality are spoiled. When different working of some parts of the brain and the production of faulty proteins are tested in the laboratory, we find striking findings: For instance, through experimental manipulations with some drugs, a person can be put into mystic experiences. The religious order of “Hashashins”, which formed a community of suicide commandoes, made people in the Middle East believe in mystic experience. A neurologist in Boston diagnosed a temporal lobe disorder, for the first time in 1975, in the brain of an epileptic person who was interested in religion and philosophy. Thus, it was determined that the regions that process such information in the brains of people who suffer a seizure in the form of mystic experience are spoiled.
Is mystic experience, which is a brain phenomenon, a beginning or a result? Is belief in God a product of human brain or did God create brain as a means of connection between the abstract universe and the concrete universe? People will answer these questions based on their philosophy of life. However, it is a fact that those who have mystic experiences can be saved from the staggering effect in the discussions regarding the existence of the creator. Being entranced is a state that is invisible and it cannot be perceived by five senses but it makes consciousness perceive that power with the feeling of “there is a power there”.
Those who think about existence excessively can have mystic experiences. A passionate lover sees the image of his sweetheart everywhere; similarly, obsessive people will hallucinate regarding the issues that they think about a lot and they will have imagination. This imagination is the most important data to explain the intuitions and inspirations of poets, painters and composers, in short, artists. It is possible to think that mental focusing and concentration have an effect that make people access the information files in the abstract universe. It is known that prophets dealt with ontological imaginations a lot in the troubled periods and before prophethood. Hazrat Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, had an insistent effort to make a connection with the abstract universe. When he reached a certain level of competence, he was given information that had not been given to anyone else. Similarly, Mozart had such mental concentration in his field that he attained information that nobody had attained in the musical universe. If the biographies of the inventors that made scientific explorations like Piri Reis and Sinan, the Architect, are examined, mental focusing, emotional concentration and imagination infrastructure directed to the aim will be easily seen.
New information that comes to man through mental concentration brings along conviction. Those people live the feelings of reality so deeply that they believe in the thing that they concentrate on as if they have seen it through their own eyes. It is an issue of different discussion whether those realities are in compliance with rational data.
The claim that the premise is real, the existence of abstract principles regarding the premise, hypothesis based on reality and logically defined inferences are necessary for data to be rational.
It is possible to attain some results when the data of mystic experience are evaluated based on those criteria. The first one is that people live their mystic experiences really. The second is appropriateness to abstract principles related to the data like, good, true, beautiful and useful. The third one is the assumption produced based on mystic experiences, which shows the existence of an outer force. The fourth one is the definition made logically; it takes man to the following premise: “I believe in the existence of the creator acting upon the system in nature; similarly, I believe in a force that will make me happy acting upon the conviction in my mystic experience and the change in my perception of reality.”
It is really difficult for man to perceive the existence of the creator through five senses. However, man feels the existence of the creator and believes in him through emotional judgment. The most different and special thing about our religious perceptions is this: Enthusiasm originating from tranquility, inner peace and ease… The existence of this feeling enables the formation of logical inferences and a bond of causality based on the existence of a power that addresses this feeling. History of religions is full of examples of gladness of being saved from fears, and the role of enthusiasm and inner peace caused by absolute surrender. Those who say the universe has been formed in accordance with a theory and plan that human mind can understand do not regard belief as a scientific category but new scientific knowledge states that understanding the creator consists of a reasoning that feelings related to schematic existence that is based on a theory that the mind can perceive, emotional judgment and a plan in which quantum mechanics is in the foreground. The feelings of appreciation and admiration in religion are transformed into habits like all feelings of appreciation and admiration. People start to live the religion in the form rituals whose origins they forgot. This ontological questioning is an important and useful questioning that will lead man to discover the realities of modern life again.
The discussions of cosmic design that are mentioned a lot in science circles have been talked about more especially after the computer revolution. The need to believe in divine mind forms the common constituents of people psychologically no matter what the result is. There is a cause and effect relationship between the existence of food and the feeling of hunger; similarly, there is a bond of causality between the need to believe in divine mind and the existence of divine mind.
To regard the existence of divine mind as a phenomenon without understanding the universe is not contrary to basic principles; on the contrary, it is a reality of the scientific thought. For instance, when the church opposed Galileo, he defended himself as follows: “If God had not wanted people to examine nature, he would not have given people an organ like the brain.” It is stated that Einstein believed in God but he was an agnostic regarding religions. He said, “I am interested in how the universe was created; why it was created is not my area of interest.” He even said that he made his discoveries by asking this question: “How would I create the universe if I were God.”
If a person is not curious about the reality of the thing that he believes in and does not research it, this belief is not in compliance with scientific principles. Without questioning the reality of belief, it is very difficult for that knowledge to shape life.
Richard Dawkins, the evolutionist biologist who wrote the book called “the God Delusion”, has a rightful approach regarding the issue. For the English politician Tony Benn, who said, “I have not felt any interest in whether Christianity beliefs are real or not”, Dawkins says, “A typical example of belief in belief syndrome”. What is meant by this phrase is that he is not interested in whether what he believes is real or not. This view, which evaluates religious beliefs only through their ethical dimension, holds the view that a belief that cannot be accepted as a guide in terms of ethics is valueless even if it is scientific; it is the religious understanding that can be called traditional or classic.
Those who defend the principle of accepting this belief, which can be defined as imitative belief, considering its benefits for the community, politics and trade but without questioning its other aspects will feel helpless when confronted by people like Dawkins, who have strong thoughts. Belief becomes permanent when it occurs as a result of questioning. It is easier to approve a religious doctrine that is reasonable and in compliance with science. Besides, to oppose an understanding of religion that is based on lies complies with divine target. To accept that religious doctrines that are contrary to empirical data are not creed but ignorance makes science enrich belief.
On the other hand, a person who proves his belief and trusts in it does not avoid discussing it with others. No scientific opinion opposes the ethical value of religion, its being an ethical compass, making people relieved, its power of consoling and adding meaning to life. People who are not afraid of the truth of their belief system and discussing the truth use the method of this age. Those who trust in their belief are contemporary religious people that live the strength of believing with deep thought and without abandoning the satisfaction of believing with submission.
When scientific approaches that try to find the truth are transformed into ideological discussions, it becomes necessary to define the aim very well. At this point, to ask the question, “Is the aim to develop the scientific thought or to discredit religion?” can help reveal the aim.
Lawrence M. Krauss, the famous astrophysicist, who tries to find an answer to the question, “Can God hypothesis be tested through science?”, mentions shaking the belief of people by making them question their belief instead saying their belief is absurd unlike some scientists; he writes a letter to the Pope Benedict XVI and asks him to approve natural selection. Krauss also mentions that the view, “Nothing is understood until everything is understood” about wrong ideas is wrong when belief doctrines are discussed. He also emphasizes that the following view is also wrong: “The evidences of a UFO fanatic cannot be refuted one by one. You cannot defend that UFO’s are impossible.” He asks the following question: “is it possible to examine all of the opposing claims one by one and to test the theoretical expectation and God hypothesis?” Krauss adds the following questions to his questions regarding God and science: “Does science enrich belief? Does science have to demolish belief? Is the aim of science to liberalize the world from God or to smooth the unreal, harmful aspects of religious fundamentalism?
Apart from the questions of Krausss mentioned above, the following sentence of Dawkins is an idea that draws reaction a lot in the USA: “If you meet someone who says he does not believe in evolution, you can say that person is ignorant, stupid and mad.” Although we do not know whether Dawkins say it with the intention of mental provocation or as a simple and careless expression, when we evaluate this view in terms of scientific methodology, we can say that claiming that evolution is a proven coefficient does not mean rejecting the Creator.
If traditional religiousness tries to spread a belief that is narrow-minded and spiritually poor, it is the duty of science to refute those religious doctrines that are based on plain theses. Ignorance is not a fault at this point but it is necessary to question whether it has the intention of deceiving. However, to define a person who does not believe in evolution as mad is not a scientific approach. If such a definition is expressed, a person who defends the opposite view can define a person who does not believe in God as mad. What Dawkins states regarding the issue is a thought that is away from scientific principles.
On the other hand, Krauss, who defends the current approach in theoretical physics, says, “This visible world is very simple for God. The comprehensive universe expressed by science is much more impressive. It is even more appropriate the think that there are more universes.”
When we study both Dawkins and Krauss, it is a fact that what they understand from God is very narrow and limited. To know the creator within the framework of the belief of oneness presented by the Quran will help eliminate confusion.
When we study evolution as micro and macro evolution, we see that micro evolution does not contradict with the doctrine of the Quran. An evolution that is under the control of the Creator complies with religious doctrines. In natural selection, a selection that enables transformation has not been proved. We cannot understand natural selection without discussing that the best and the strongest are advantageous. At this point, it is necessary to ask evolutionists this question: If the strongest is evaluated as the best as it is claimed, why is the lion not the most common animal in the jungle?
Even if we accepted the coincidental arrangement of matter for a moment, how would we explain the coincidental arrangement and evolution of abstract and symbolic thought? It is a question that has not been answered. For instance, can a monkey learn how to speak, symbolic or abstract thought by living among human beings for thousands of years? Let alone a monkey, even a wild child who is over the age of being taught cannot be taught humane values. We know that evolution cannot explain everything but we should not forget that we cannot prove that evolution does not exist. To say, “there is nothing called evolution” is not possible in terms of the mind and science. The existence of an evolution controlled by divine control is not contrary to divine target. For instance, the developments in DNA technology and bioengineering can form a being with the appearance of half man half monkey, but it seems impossible to give them the property of being a man and the information of man.
The assumption that life is a struggle, which is accepted by evolutionists more, is refuted by the fact that the rule in nature is solidarity and that struggle is an exception. There is a balance among all species in the universe, from the moss to the fish, from the lizard to the plants, from the elephant to wild animals. Though a fish produces millions of eggs and they are consumed by big fish, the fish does not become extinct. A sheep gives birth to a lamb every year; that lamb is slaughtered when it is two years old. A dog gives birth to five or six puppies every year; they are not slaughtered by butchers but the number of sheep is higher than the number of dogs. In order to explain the relationship between two different species, this question can be asked: Is the relationship between sheep and man based on struggle, or can it be said that it is a relationship based on solidarity? When the facts that we know are considered, both parties support one another in terms of species. Even if we see the attitude of struggle and annihilation in terms of individuals, examination of this attitude in terms of species shows that solidarity is in the foreground. Those who say they need God should accept, first of all, that the hypothesis of evolution is not proven information.
That the people who examine the events in the universe and evolution cannot evaluate the realities correctly makes it impossible attain the truth. When we act by seeing the whole, we see a balance that is based on the just sharing in the universe and the approach full of love. When the greed of man, his stupid egoism, and unsatisfied ambition spoil the just balance, environmental disasters, global warming and world wars will be inevitable realities. Then, the universe will not seem to us with its wrong and disastrous aspects; when we see the eternity with a bird’s-eye view, it will seem as a perfect design. The acts of the fanatics that hit the skyscrapers with planes on behalf of religion and the acts of the ignorant people who sacrifice their children to God on behalf of religion will not bring about a reliable result in religious evaluation. It is impossible to try to reach the true target with wrong knowledge.
Before we start to deal with the hypothesis regarding the existence of God, it will be appropriate to make a definition of God. When we examine the four hypotheses regarding the beginning of the universe instead of the God hypothesis one by one, if we refute three of those hypotheses, we can think that the remaining one is true. This situation is like the case of the people trying to find their way on top of a mountain: When the mountaineers saw that the three ways that they thought would lead to the top did not lead, they followed the fourth way without questioning and advised everybody the fourth way. When they understood that the three hypotheses were not possible, they noticed that the last alternative is the most reasonable one and they agreed on it because there is definitely a way that leads to the top. This reality is called transcendental reality or the reality of believing in the unseen. We can list the hypoyhesis regarding the existence of the universe in a way similar to the one in the example as follows:
Hypothesis of coincidental existence
Hypothesis of the autonomy of the universe
Hypothesis of the sovereignty of the rules
Hypothesis of Intelligent Design (God Hypothesis)
Since the topic of our book is the psychology of belief, when we evaluate it by leaving biological data aside, it is possible to see that when a person doubts the reality of his belief, the psychological determinants of belief change. Therefore, it will be useful to define belief with reasonable reality. Beliefs that are groundless and are not sound are doctrines based on wrongs, and they affect people’s spiritual lives, thought forms, problem-solving styles and their view of life.
Even the following example alone will refute the hypothesis of coincidental existence, which is the first hypothesis regarding belief: In our DNA chain, there is a protein molecule called Tolemer. Tolemer determines the lifespan of DNA, that is, how many times it can be divided. According to the calculus of probabilities, 10^50 is regarded as impossible. The probability of Tolemer to be arranged in an order by wind and lightning on its own is 10^652. That is, according to the calculus of probabilities, it is much higher than 10^50, which shows that coincidental existence is impossible. The fact that even a single molecule of DNA is based on such fine calculations shows that it is not possible to explain the beginning of the universe with coincidental existence.
The second theory is based on the autonomy of the universe. The universe has a property that works on its own like a machine; that is, it does not break down; it does not necessitate calibration or maintenance. Let alone the way of eliminating the ugliness, disasters and evils in nature and being affected by these disasters for a machine like that, it is an unanswered question how this machine makes itself operate such faultlessly, completely, perfectly, easily and fast. Even a computer which is said to be perfect goes out of order when it is not used for a long time or is not maintained; it does not work when it is affected by a virus; when the view of the autonomy of the universe is taken into consideration, is such a breakdown not expected? If there is not a control that will prevent the balance from being upset, the machine of the universe will not work properly. It means, an outer control mechanism is obligatory for the universe.
The third theory is based on the sovereignty of the rules. All kinds of views from the Newton principle to the rules of Archimedes show that the universe exists in a digital format. There is a cause and effect relationship in everything. Standards are certain. There is no ruleless, undefined deed in the universe. When elements like knowledge, energy, meaningfulness and matter come together, are they enough for the universe to operate regularly? Think of a construction; first the project of the construction is drawn, the place of the construction is determined, finance is supplied, materials are bought, workers are found and work starts. The job definitions and the rules are clear for carrying out the tasks properly. However, when the owner of the project does not exist, when his will is not felt, the construction is not done. Rules and definitions are dead texts. A will that will animate them is necessary.
The fourth theory regarding the existence of the universe is the hypothesis that the universe was created and is controlled by the divine will. Only a being whose wisdom, power and will is endless can administer the universe. Our research regarding the issue is like “the ants analyzing the elephant”. Positive sciences like physics, chemistry, mathematics and biology explain how the language of the creation is. To believe in the divine mind and absolute consciousness that does not show itself and that transforms the world into a living laboratory is the most reasonable option.