In the concluding part of the book "Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science," Carl Sagan posed one of the "Ultimate Questions" as

"My deeply held belief is that if a god of anything like the traditional sort exists, our curiosity and intelligence were provided by such a god ... on the other hand if such a god does not exist then our curiosity and intelligence are the essential tools for survival"

Lets break it down:

Either

"If a god of anything like the traditional sort exists, our curiosity and intelligence were provided by such a god"

OR, ... "on the other hand"

"If such a god does not exist then our curiosity and intelligence are the essential tools for survival"

Here is my short comments:

If the instinct of "survival" points to something beyond mere "survival" then both "Either", or ""... on the other hand" points towards something more like a "design" or "telos" or what the ancients used to call "God". 

But Segan chose not to go there; instead, he intentionally tried to confuse people who trusted him. Regrettably, many still trust him and are left in a state of perpetual confusion.