Es esmu par to domājusi. Bet, piemēram, tas pats čalis Rossano, kas lieliski skaidro morāles un reliģijas veidošanos evolūcijas ceļā, un saka, ka "religion emerged after morality and built upon morality by expanding the social scrutiny of individual behavior to include supernatural agents. By including ever watchful ancestors, spirits and gods in the social realm, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups. The adaptive value of religion would have enhanced group survival", citā vietā atsaucas uz Barru un piekrīt, ka "To avoid an immaterial Creator as the ultimate explanation for the universe’s deep order, the materialist, must either accept the laws of physics as “brute facts” (i.e. they just are and we don’t ask why they are) or he (she) must appeal to chance (usually in the form of multiple universes with variable laws of physics). If ours is but one of an infinity of universes (or possibly “domains” within a multiverse) then simply by chance a universe will arise with physical laws such as ours. While this is certainly possible, a critical point is that proposing an infinity of unobservable entities is no more scientifically defensible than proposing a single unobservable one (God). Indeed, sustaining a purely materialistic view of the universe, requires repeatedly pleading for a multiplicity of envisioned infinities—of universes, planets, durations, realities, observers, etc.—a habit that severely undercuts the materialist position."
Iespējams, ka jautājums: if God exists, why does He let all this bullshit happen? nemaz nav tik retorisks, kā sākumā šķiet.
Enīhau, paldies, protams, ka "atļauj man padomāt". :)