"All ravens are black, however, it is impossible to show truth of such a proposition.
Even if one hundred, one thousand, hundred thousand ravens are black, this fact will show never, that all ravens are black. For it , it would be necessary to have knowledge of all the ravens which have existed, are existing and will exist ; what is impossible.
But it is enough to see an only raven of other colour than black, so that proposal is false, so that we are certain about its falsity ...
Therefore this asymmetry represents : a finite group of basic statements which enable, if they are true, the change of an universal law, while they can never verify this law".

Well, but that say to us nothing as for the meta-reason (the meta-intention) which incites to research of the truth and to recognizing of its primacy.

Nevertheless, this asymmetry shows that unceasingly and in every being, of the mysterious incitements (and comprehensions) help in choices of value’s references, in particular those associated to sufficient truths, and it, even if these truths are only relative !

Mysteriously too, the reality's dynamics shows respect of directions (of the sense) ; the universal laws and evolution processes give evidence of it sufficiently.
Why that ?
Is not because the respect of the sense and directions is an universal necessity ?
We are convinced of it. 

*

The universe's evolutions of which some ones can be represented by laws, presuppose, naturally, primordial immutable truths, notably those which have enabled the life's appearance and its development.
But then, ceaseless researchs of the novelty that take place in the cells and which necessitate specific truths, have they only for objective, complexity's increases of some "parts" of the life's phenomenon and it, only on one planet ?,
even, these researchs have they henceforth as objective the "preservation" of the humankind during a ridiculously short period compared to history of our galaxy ?
To imagine it, is absurd.

Indeed,
- on the one hand, life’s phenomenon and the men are universe’s potentialities which can be actualized (materialized to become realities) as soon as "composition" of a planet is appropriate,
- on the other hand, creative entity, of transcendent order, who animates us and manages universe, this immensurable construction site, for ever unfinished,
as Sisyphus who was condemned to the eternal task of rolling a large stone,
in us, has to work to know and must research to know more, and it, in spite of inexorable universal constraints and everyday servitudes.
Of numerous relative truths today, especially scientific, are thus more than "beliefs among other ones",
they are necessary truths that characterize our epoch.

Of course,
"any human proposition has same authority that other ones, if the reason do not make the difference",
more exactly, any human proposition has same value that other ones if of reasoned activities do not enable to us to do the difference (the reason is not an operator),
alas,
"The biggest and most powerful means of persuasion, ..., are the multitudes of years and of faithful ; …. the faiths surpass so much the wise men." (cf. Pierre Charron. - The Wisdom - I, 42).

Besides,
"Do you believe that a false opinion has less power than bile on the one who has jaundice, and venom on the one who has been bitten by a rabid dog ?" (cf. Marcus Aurelius - Thoughts, book VI).

Yes, we know henceforth, that non-truths, false truths, errors, uncertainties influence psychical and physical balances of individuals.
Nevertheless, why does one believe today still to ancestral truths rejected by the sciences ?,
why do false truths go through, so easily, generations ?

                                                                                                            * 

Let us quote again Descartes :
"… can we imagine a being produced by this sovereign Creator of all things, who is not perfect and completely finished in all his parts ? And certainly, there is no doubt, God did not create me so that I never make mistakes … ; it is sure also, that He always wants what is better ; therefore, is it more advantageous for me, to mistake or not to mistake ? ....
Because by the only understanding I can't accept or deny the things, but I conceive only the ideas of things, which I may accept or deny. " (cf. Metaphysical meditations - fourth Meditation). 

Indeed, it’s idea that we have of things.
But, Descartes had an elementary world's comprehension, if we compare it to ours : he has never imagined the men and animals, as extraordinary pôles of creative activities taking place in their cells, and even until quantum level, and therefore, concerning whole universe,
of creative activities of transcendent order, the ideas of which are the singular fruits.
So, his "cogito ergo sum" is prelude of an unfinished symphony.
Actually, Descartes (1596, 1650) could not express all his ideas when we know, for example, that at Toulouse, philosopher Vanini Giulio Cesare was burned (1619) on the public square to have dared to propose a naturalistic theory which was recognizing kinship relations between the monkeys and men. 

But then, why the philosophers (and the theologians) have they nowaday, a so little creativity ?
Most of them have lost their critical sense of the sciences and seem satisfied of numerous current false truths (Big Bang, time which began, time which will finish,…).

Let's reject therefore, these false truths, especially those according to which the universal laws, the nature, the organs as the brain and genes, the consciousness, the culture, …,
are operators having faculties which enable recognitions, judgments, choices, …, decisions and acts,
and let's meditate with regard to incitements which induce us to research of more truths and knowledges.

These incitements indeed, like mysterious voices, come from a beyond the real : the abstraction's domain ; they are besides, theoretically all respectable on account of their transcendent nature (order), ipso facto, of their divine character. 

You noticed it, we moderated our comment by the expression "theoretically all respectable" because although these incitements have a divine character, actions which result, are not always respectable.
Here is certainly, one of the big mysteries which veil implication’s comprehension in world, of a creative entity of divine character.

Think of the abominable murders which "enamel" the current events, with references to God.
Far from us however, idea that such acts are attributable to incitements of some demons.
They show plainly, them too, existence of freedom degrees which are specific in us, universal in matter.
The freedom and its limits, another big mystery !

                                                                                                           *