[ For version 2.0 of this argument go to:
Our most basic, irreducible, and unavoidable assumptions include those necessarily assumed and referenced to be able to think about anything whatsoever and function as environmentally-dependent beings.
Therefore, these assumptions are required to recognize and know that certain objects of our experience are persons.
Hence, taken together, like the operating system of a computer, these exceptionless standards and fixed values we operate with as running assumptions, are necessarily treated as the unified structure of an ideal ultimate personal mind, referred to for just as much omniscience, authority, universality, transcendence, and other ultimate characteristics, as any traditional idea of a personal ultimate mind or being---or God---is conceivable of being.
Because these assumptions are necessarily referenced as a universal standard, they constitute a unified non-local criterial structure that arbitrates all truth about everything including itself.
Therefore, treating this systemic intellectual object as a reality-wide guide in all my thinking about everything, is unavoidably necessary, even in reasoned denials that this object has that status as an ultimate universal ruling factor.
I don't wake up in the morning wondering whether reason is going to be functioning, like I might wonder about my computer. I'm going to approximate what reason unwaveringly indicates as the perfection standard it is, and there is no controversy about the authority of what it reveals to me, even if I don't live up to it or perfectly actualize that rational ideal.
Furthermore, we merely need to contemplate these ultimates of mind such as reason, formal logic, the rule-set of an ordered context of reality, a hierarchy of values, and so on, in order to discover an endless stream of new knowledge when applied to our ongoing experience of the world.
Therefore, there is some sense in which these ultimate decisive rules and ideals of thought actually communicate knowledge and even wisdom by merely thinking about them and their relationship to our belief systems and our world of objects.
Lastly, the necessity of our referencing of these principles itself implies both purpose and value, which are equally ultimate in this comprehensive set of guiding operational principles. We reference inferential factors for various purposes, and those purposes are based on a hierarchical set of values, which cannot be denied or ignored without thereby still being assumed to be ultimate mind-ruling factors in carrying out such denials and other predications about those values.
Consequently, I believe in God because my thinking already necessarily assumes and references an unchanging, enduring, transcendental and universal criterial factor of all thought that arbitrates all issues including the nature of personhood, and is both practically and theoretically indistinguishable from an ultimate personal mind or God.
