Arguments for God's Existence from Contingency

[Mystic]

All arguments from God don't prove things from purely abstract, but from what we observe in the signs in ourselves, and in things we acknowledge.

In fact, your phrase "argument alone" is confusing the issue of what arguments are. Arguments make use of facts we know.

For example the argument of ultimate value and the signs in ourselves, makes use that we see ourselves to have inherent objective value even if we aren't sure of what that is and what our measurement is.

I went into elaboration.

You show one argument for God that doesn't make use of observations or facts we know.

If the word 'evidence' that's giving you trouble, evidences are facts that inferentially support or undermine a proposition. Evidence is used in an inferential argument, not a deductive one, and is probabilistic, never necessarily true.

Bob is dead.
Bob was killed with a weapon that made a particular type of a wound.
I have a weapon that would make a wound like that.
I am more likely to have killed Bob than someone without a weapon like that.

As you can see, that's slim pickings to hang someone on. That's why it almost always takes multiple lines of evidence to reach near certainty, although inferring from evidence can never take us to absolute certainty. That's reserved for deductive arguments, when we accept the premises are true and the conclusion is properly arrived at (non-fallacious).

Do you know somethings are mutually exclusive while somethings are more comprehensive?

Evidence can make things appear highly unlikely to be not true.  We make use of this in court.

It is used to support the case.

However, sometimes evidence with proper analysis can reach certainty.

And sometimes you can be certain even by evidence you have not thought about.

For example, I never been to China, but I am sure the country exists.

And I was sure of this even before being introduced to philosophy.

There are different type proofs. As a baby I had to rely on instinct. I had to trust parents. 

But the loving nature parents act upon is not only evidence, their actions are evidence, the baby grows psychologically and physically different (I mean the brain get's wired differently) depending on how they act.

What was your evidence as a child that your parents were truly your biological parents? 

Sure you are not certain, but you didn't know your evidence, but you had plenty, and believed in it due to that.


I feel in case of God evidence exists for sure and we always had it. It's propaganda that has made them less evident.

There are so many features that point to God. But with reflection, we will see we always knew God due to abundance of evidence and signs, and we can even be helped by God and Prophets and leaders from, as well as great philosophers, to reflect on things that will decisively remind us on how we know God exists.

But if someone comes to someone and tells him, the earth is flat and it's control mechanism to make us believe it's round,  it would be foolish for him to throw out all the knowledge he has of the earth being round. 

Sure he may not know all the evidence he knows for that, in that sense, he has not reflect about it. But if he doubts it, he should try to analyse what he knows for certain instead of brainlessly demanding for evidence for the earth being round, when there is plenty of evidence the earth is not flat, to the extent of certainty.