The explanation for why God permitted human uncertainty about the future: a defined image of one’s future life does not make him to change his present state; on the contrary, he would be convinced to guard his present state in order to advance to that image in a natural manner.
Nonetheless, the relentless character of human life to any important change can be observed even if there is not any knowledge of the future. Those who accused men for such compliance with the common refusal of change were philosophers as Heraclitus or Socrates. Both of them recall for a change of life using the logos, that is the reason, the word, the understanding. All of these senses of logos opposed to the simpler appeal to images.
Therefore, we might suppose that the men still action as if they have images of their future life, even they have not. They have instead images of their life without a temporal determination. The lack of temporality allows someone to suppose that such images can be located in any time of his life, even in the future.
The possession of such images makes someone confident in his life and in his knowledge about himself: another feature of common people that was attacked by Socrates.
A philosophical demand of renouncing to images for thoughts will ever encounter the difficulty of being heard as divine message does when it reminds to the men that they not have the image of their future life. As different as a divine message, philosophers cannot receive the reverence generally accorded to a god of uncertainty.