An Intellectual Exchange

UNIVERSAL EVIDENCE OF GOD AND THE HEREAFTER material in nature. They cannot be observed by the human eye directly, but every scientist believes in their existence for the simple reason that although we cannot see these things directly, we can see their effects—for example, the heat of an electron, a falling apple, in the case of gravity, and a photo film, in the case of X-rays. We believe in the existence of all these things, not by direct observation but by their effects, or, in other words, by indirect knowledge or the inferential argument. This change in human knowledge also changed the acceptance of the method of argument. It is now well established in science that the inferential argument is as valid as the direct argument. In the classical physics stage, people held that the concept of God pertained to the unseen world and that since no direct argument was available to prove it, belief in God was illogical. Since they were inferential, they considered all the relevant indirect arguments as scientifically invalid. But now the whole situation has changed. As nothing is observable, the existence of anything can be established only using the inferential argument, not the direct argument. If the inferential argument is valid concerning the unseen micro-world, it is also valid about the existence of God and other religious truths. Following this change in the basis of scientific argument, proving the existence of God became as possible as proving the existence of the subatomic particle known as the electron. As is known, the presence of the electron is proved through the inferential argument or evidence. We cannot see the electron, but we can infer its existence by