Comments about ‘For skeptics and believers, it's turtles all the way down’

I find it disheartening when a criticism of secular thought indicates that the critic doesn’t understand even the very basic principles of what he’s criticizing.

Cannon’s biggest flaw is to equate philosophical “proof” with scientific “proof”. In philosophy, you have to assume some axioms to have something to talk about. Sure. But in science, the discussion isn’t about abstract axioms and their implications, but rather about the observable universe.

When the believer says something like, “the universe is so great an intelligent being must have designed it”, it isn’t satisfactory. This is illustrated by looking at the follow-up question, “the designer then must surely be great. Who designed the designer?” Turtles all the way down.

In contrast, the secularist simply deals with observable reality and doesn’t take leaps of faith beyond that. When you get to the limit of what’s observable, the secularist doesn’t say “turtles all the way down”. He simply says, “I don’t know.”

What you're telling us Mr. Cannon is that the earth does rest on the back of a tortoise and it is turtles all the way down.

Gdel also said, "I like Islam: it is a consistent idea of religion and open-minded."

Unfortunately, great mathematicians, logicians, and scientists - just like anyone - can be spot on about some things and dead wrong about other things.

I use the turtle story in class... liberal arts class. it is not used to bebunk God or anything else. It is a story of a wizard who antitipates the King asking the obvious question about who is holding up the earth. I use the story as a good example of limited thinking... and how the wizard and other advisors give advice that we the common people should re-examine.

The students smile and get the joke. Turtles all the way down is just a story to get students and adults to think, think, think!!! And not to accept blind advise just because the wizards tell us what is right and wrong.

Interesting article. I was a little taken back because I had always believed that Mormons did not believe in science, DNA, archaeological evidence, evolution, etc.

We'll try to not upset the turtle.

(rolls eyes)

In your attempt to raise science above the philosophy, you still admit that dealing with observable reality is a leap of faith. Contrary to assumptions, we cannot always believe what we see and we can believe even less the conclusions we draw from what we think we are seeing. I’m reminded of the scientists who pulled winged from a fly and told it fly. Conclusion — flies cannot hear without their wings.

in science. But only when it supports their cause.

@7:38,

What comes before the observable? You start your argument in the middle of the story instead of starting at the beginning.

Saying "I don't know" implies that there is something preceding the observable.

Religion has that answer. Science does not. Science limits us to thinking inside the box. Religion leads us to think outside the box.

Religion, unsullied by philosophy, teaches the true nature of Godhood and of the true destiny of those who accept eternal laws and the responsibility that obedience to those eternal laws leads.

If the universe is truly without limit, without boundaries, then the possibility of eternal creation is also without limit, each galaxy or galaxies being the stewardship of those entrusted with their creation.

The phase, "one eternal round", has meaning to those who occasionally peek outside the box and ponder the possibilities.

A kind father would never overwhelm his toddler son with information that is beyond his son's ability to comprehend, instead he would give his son additional information, line upon line, precept upon precept, as his son progresses and learns to use that information. We are the toddlers. God is the father.

"...Religion has that answer. Science does not...Religion, unsullied by philosophy, teaches the true nature of Godhood..."

I see. This "true nature of Godhood" you talk about is just there to be had by anyone who will be willing to cough up ten percent of their income and trust the warm fuzzy feeling they get when told such quips as "families are forever."

No, Mike, the question of the ultimate reality and origins of the universe is still very open and there is no mortal organization that can claim a monopoly on the whos and hows and whys. The only honest folk are those with the courage to say "I don't know." The 7:38 poster has it right.

"Religion has the answer" In the Beginning God created the heaven and earth, (Gen 1:1)

"all things through him became(egeneto) and without him became not one thing which has become."' (John 1:3 Greek NT)

1.If an ifinite number of moments occurred before today,then today would never come,because it is impossible to traverse an infinite number of moments.
2. But today has come
3. Hence,there was a finite number of moments before today; the Universe has a beginning.
The Philosophical argument for (Gen 1:1) In the beginning.

If it is just answers with out prove of authenticity you are looking for there are many lovely and happy fables you can make your religion that are more wonderful than any present religion.

@Mike Richards | 11:19 a.m. Dec. 13, 2009

Can't you see that your worldview is just a bunch of made-up, amorphous fluff?

@ 12:33,

If you're so concerned with 10%, how will you ever give 100%?

God gives his children everything and promises to divide with them all his blessings, not just 10%, not just 25%, but 100%, and you have a problem with 10%. Does that say something about you or about God?

@ 3:37,
Today in church we sang "O Little Town of Bethlehem". The last part of verse three is, "No ear may his His coming, But in this world of sin, Where meek souls will receive him still, The dear Christ enters in."

To you, Christ may be a fable. His role as creator of Heaven and Earth may seem far fetched. But to those of us who have let him in, we wonder how others could be so blind to not see, to not feel, to not understand that there is more, so very much more than can be seen or touched or proved. When you are ready, He will be waiting.

so because there is not currently an explanation for what occurred before the bug bang it proves there is a god? the lack of evidence of one thing is not evidence of something else. Where is your proof of god?

Secularists do NOT deal with "observed reality"

just look evolution, it is all based on "created reality"

in fact it can be decribed as turtle standing on turle all the way down.

without all its assumptions and suppositions,

it standa on nothing, but faith.


a dog size dinosaur becomes ancestor of tyranasaur, (with no of way proving it)

simply because that is what someone wants to believe, because it assuming helps make a theory believable.

what they should have said is "we don't know" or "I don't know"

Either something came from nothing, something is eternal or everything was created by an eternal something.

THe answer is 42.

The only knowable answer is that I dont know, and neither do you.

"The only knowable answer is that I dont know, and neither do you."

That is an opinion. Yours. You cannot "know" what someone else knows. You can only guess.