Book: The only possible basis for proving the existence of God

I avoided refutation in every possible way, no matter how significantly my positions differed from those of others. Let the reader himself, who has mastered the meaning of both, compare them. If we tested the unbiased judgments of various thinking persons with the sincerity of an incorruptible judge who weighs the arguments of the disputing parties in such a way that he himself mentally imagines himself in the place of those who express them, and thus can recognize in them all the power that they only generally can have, and only then decides which side to take, then philosophers would disagree much less and unfeigned justice, impartial impartiality in the readiness to take the side of the enemy himself to the extent that it is possible, would soon unite inquisitive minds on the same path.

Perhaps in some places I am giving a not entirely detailed explanation in order to deprive those who only seemingly enough reason to throw a bitter reproach to the author of heresy, of any opportunity to do so, although what caution can generally prevent this?

As for those who, not being able to contemplate everything as a whole, are chained to this or that little thing and do not think about whether the censure that this little thing may deserve, also the significance of the whole, or about whether Whether improvements in individual parts retain the basic plan, which suffers from flaws only in details, then this kind of people, always striving only to turn every building that has been started into ruins, can, it is true, inspire fear with their multiplicity, but their judgment about its true value has little meaning for reasonable people.