has been regarded by groups of speculative thinkers as inferential knowledge, for which they have therefore constructed a proof—either through syllogistic reasoning or through analogy.

The first is the assertion: “Everything that comes into being must have an agent who brings it into being.” The second is the assertion: “This has come into being and therefore requires an agent who brought it into being, by analogy with buildings and writing.”

Among those who maintain that everything that comes into being must have an agent who brings it into being, some establish this by arguing that whatever comes into being has particular characteristics, and that specifying those characteristics requires an agent who specifies them. Some, in turn, establish this by arguing that whatever has such particular characteristics is contingent, and that whatever is contingent requires a determining factor for its existence. Others establish this by arguing that a contingent thing is equally susceptible to existence and nonexistence, so one of the two alternatives must be made to prevail.

Many people regard the first premise in these arguments as self-evident; indeed, they consider it more evident than the second premise, which is used to prove it. Such confusion occurs only with general, universal propositions.

As for the fact that this building must have a builder, this piece of writing must have a writer, this sewn garment must have a tailor, these footprints on the ground must have an agent who left them, this blow must have someone who struck it, this work of craftsmanship must have a craftsman, and this