I just love this. Great job. Really thought provoking and kinda fun. Just think differently. Just because we don't see the earth resting on something - doesn't mean it isn't. A turtle made entirely of dark matter perhaps? Gravity tells the what (the ball will fall down), but not the why (why not fall up?). Dependent origination, causes and conditions - nothing exists in independent isolation.
Actually, "turtles all the way down" refutes reductionism. Using the line of logic that scientific inquiry can somehow exclude what is outside the natural world, including such phrases as "god is not necessary" is in of itself a violation of your conclusion.
In other words: You say that we shouldn't make assumptions based on our reference frame and then seem to advocate just that. You're just taking a convoluted path to down the same "turtles" conclusion. Even "reason" depends on locality.
How am I advocating the making of assumptions based on our reference? By stating that we SHOULDN'T make assumptions based on our reference? I'm using an analogy to show that speculating on what is "outside" the natural world necessitates unwarranted assumptions based on our reference, and I am NOT advocating any assumptions myself.
"Reason" is about communication, and yes, depends on locality. RATIONALITY, on the other hand, does not depend on locality any more than mathematics does.
@somecomputergeek I'm not disagreeing; however, you make a metaphysical implication that I don't think you're aware of. Positivism. You say science and reason are the pillars to understanding the universe and seem to sight their achievements as evidence, but you fail to acknowledge that the basis for scientific inquiry is a collection of unprovable assumptions. This in of itself suggests that even scientific thought can fall victim to "turtles all the way down" when applied beyond its means.
I'm aware of my positivism. Do you have a method that is better than science for determining truth about our physical universe? The basis for scientific inquiry is a collection of unprovable assumptions? What unprovable assumptions are those? That consistency is more reliable than inconsistency? That observation is more trustworthy than speculation? That objectivity and reason are more likely to lead to correct conclusions than divine revelation?
@somecomputergeek Perhaps its all a figment of imagination.. but WHO's imagination? no matter the frame, its turtles all the way down. from economy's to science to religion to mathematics.
Well everybody has a different notion of God, but I think it's a little silly to invoke God as an explanation for a simple reason. If someone says the universe exists because God is holding it/created it, the most natural question one should ask is not "yes but who created God" but rather "yes, but how on earth did he do that" because by definition 'God' refers to the very point of beginning, regardless if science will ever find out what that is and how it works.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
PS.. the Earth does not really revolve around the sun.. The Earth does not move in a near circle at all, the Earth is always moving in a straight line, its the SPACE that is curved. The Earth and Sun are really flat, its their mass that bends the space into what we perceive as a sphere :) So the Earth is both flat and a sphere at the SAME TIME :)
Keep in mind, if you're going to use the space-time model you also have to visualize the line moving along the axis of time as well. Good luck with that. :p
See the TURTLE of enormous girth! On his shell he holds the earth. His thought is slow but always kind; He holds us all within his mind. On his back all vows are made; He sees the truth but mayn't aid. He loves the land and loves the sea, And even loves a child like me See the TURTLE of enormous girth, On his shell he holds the earth. If you want to run and play, Come along the BEAM today
Heh heh, i just heard the turtle quote for the first time a week ago, and now i find this vid. good work.
Seems to me that the first cause argument is really just like any other attempt to use logic to explain god. It attempts to prove that something or other can never be known, and thus we must plug up this logical hole with god. You do a good job showing that line of thinking to be questionable. Oh, and keep cranking the badass tunes.
I like your videos. Are you aware of Aristarchos of Samos, though (& Eratosthenes)? Assuming heliocentrism is roughly correct, its disturbing to see Western mankind ditching a good model for a bad one for 2 thousand years or so, then "progressing" back to it. And I point out western because -some scientific "discoveries" firmly fixed in our mythology(like blood circulation/Harvey) were provably discovered in the East centuries earlier-in this case, Tibet.
Pretty much just that. I just wanted to point out that the "used to be" time when the earth was flat was not the clear cut progression we think it was.
The ancient greeks roughly accurately calculated the circumference of the earth, and Aristarchos knew the earth went around the sun, this wasn't a Copernican discovery as we have been taught.
Sorry about the Typo. The First Nation's whose mythology you quote would have had no contact with a Tortoise. The turtles they would have been familiar with would have been North American fresh water species.
Although the word "turtle" is widely used to describe all members of the order Testudines, to avoid confusion, the word chelonian is popular among veterinarians, scientists, and conservationists working with these animals.
Thanks. I just looked up "chelonian", and it looks like its the same thing as Testudines, but also includes an extinct "proto-turtle" (the first known turtle?") called Australochelys.
Ahh, I love wikipedia. It makes it easy to trick people into thinking I know what I'm talking about.
The word "turtle" is a common term denoting all species in the order Testudines. A Tortoise, or "land turtle", is any species in the family Testudinidae, and contains several genera, including Geochelone, Gopherus, and Testudo, among others.
I was using "god" in a more metaphorical sense. I suppose I should have said "the supernatural", but the most common source of supernatural phenomenon is God, so I think it makes sense.
Yes. When i refer to "God" i do not mean "Yahweh" rather "The supernatural who created it all" (as you meant)
I did understand your meaning of the word God - and i considered editing/reply to my post correcting myself - as it sounds i refer to Yahweh.
The word God ought to be used metaphorical as you do:) God (Yahweh) is not God, God (Yahweh) is one of the many supernatural beings that we describe as a/the god.
Perhaps the earth is held in place by our mind.
newday0531 5 months ago
I just love this. Great job. Really thought provoking and kinda fun. Just think differently. Just because we don't see the earth resting on something - doesn't mean it isn't. A turtle made entirely of dark matter perhaps? Gravity tells the what (the ball will fall down), but not the why (why not fall up?). Dependent origination, causes and conditions - nothing exists in independent isolation.
newday0531 5 months ago
I didnt watch this video
i camr to know what turtles all the way down was from
395obuc 6 months ago
What the fuck man. What a bunch of nuggets.
joshlerd 6 months ago
Anyone else search this because the saw it written on a wall in Borderlands?
JeremyJackal 7 months ago
If it's to do with turtles, I WANT to believe :D
gus0509 7 months ago
Actually, "turtles all the way down" refutes reductionism. Using the line of logic that scientific inquiry can somehow exclude what is outside the natural world, including such phrases as "god is not necessary" is in of itself a violation of your conclusion.
In other words: You say that we shouldn't make assumptions based on our reference frame and then seem to advocate just that. You're just taking a convoluted path to down the same "turtles" conclusion. Even "reason" depends on locality.
0Fear 9 months ago
@0Fear
How am I advocating the making of assumptions based on our reference? By stating that we SHOULDN'T make assumptions based on our reference? I'm using an analogy to show that speculating on what is "outside" the natural world necessitates unwarranted assumptions based on our reference, and I am NOT advocating any assumptions myself.
"Reason" is about communication, and yes, depends on locality. RATIONALITY, on the other hand, does not depend on locality any more than mathematics does.
somecomputergeek 9 months ago 4
@somecomputergeek I'm not disagreeing; however, you make a metaphysical implication that I don't think you're aware of. Positivism. You say science and reason are the pillars to understanding the universe and seem to sight their achievements as evidence, but you fail to acknowledge that the basis for scientific inquiry is a collection of unprovable assumptions. This in of itself suggests that even scientific thought can fall victim to "turtles all the way down" when applied beyond its means.
0Fear 9 months ago
@0Fear
I'm aware of my positivism. Do you have a method that is better than science for determining truth about our physical universe? The basis for scientific inquiry is a collection of unprovable assumptions? What unprovable assumptions are those? That consistency is more reliable than inconsistency? That observation is more trustworthy than speculation? That objectivity and reason are more likely to lead to correct conclusions than divine revelation?
Who applied science beyond its means?
somecomputergeek 9 months ago 4
@somecomputergeek If you don't know the philosophical foundations of science, why do you even have an opinion on the matter?
Anyway, your whole post is rife with admission. I'm afraid further posting on my end will now only lead to a drawn out philosophical argument.
0Fear 9 months ago
I won't waste our time.
0Fear 9 months ago
@0Fear
too late.
somecomputergeek 9 months ago
@somecomputergeek Perhaps its all a figment of imagination.. but WHO's imagination? no matter the frame, its turtles all the way down. from economy's to science to religion to mathematics.
Betruul 2 months ago
Well everybody has a different notion of God, but I think it's a little silly to invoke God as an explanation for a simple reason. If someone says the universe exists because God is holding it/created it, the most natural question one should ask is not "yes but who created God" but rather "yes, but how on earth did he do that" because by definition 'God' refers to the very point of beginning, regardless if science will ever find out what that is and how it works.
BTIsaac 1 year ago
Atlas held up the sky. He knelt upon the Earth.
Jonstern1983 1 year ago
@Jonstern1983
Yes, you're right. Thank you. I'll add a note to the video.
somecomputergeek 1 year ago
Just awesome dude!
DavidPirtle 1 year ago
Wrong!!! It's crockaducks all the way down.
claudiaquat 2 years ago
haha well done
Clarkticus 2 years ago
1:10 LOLOLOL
vava54own 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
PS.. the Earth does not really revolve around the sun.. The Earth does not move in a near circle at all, the Earth is always moving in a straight line, its the SPACE that is curved. The Earth and Sun are really flat, its their mass that bends the space into what we perceive as a sphere :) So the Earth is both flat and a sphere at the SAME TIME :)
MASTERPPA 2 years ago
Keep in mind, if you're going to use the space-time model you also have to visualize the line moving along the axis of time as well. Good luck with that. :p
NoAntecessor 2 years ago
I agree with richardhead. The music is quite good and I would love to acquire an mp3 of it.
Also the video is pretty much awesome.
MatthiasFarland 2 years ago
DOYLERULES69X 3 years ago 6
ah yes, a fellow stephen king-fan :)
micp4130 3 years ago
Good video.
I like Terry Pratchett's response in Small Gods:
The world is a disc riding on the back of elephants, who in turn stand upon the back of a turtle.
Q: What is the turtle standing on?
A: It's a turtle, for heaven's sake. It's swims! That's what turtles do.
That's the kind of deep philosophy I can buy into. :)
joemarklawson 3 years ago 3
LOL, good one :)
micp4130 3 years ago
raucous laughter followed by subdued contemplation
charr05 2 years ago
Heh heh, i just heard the turtle quote for the first time a week ago, and now i find this vid. good work.
Seems to me that the first cause argument is really just like any other attempt to use logic to explain god. It attempts to prove that something or other can never be known, and thus we must plug up this logical hole with god. You do a good job showing that line of thinking to be questionable. Oh, and keep cranking the badass tunes.
RunDX7 3 years ago
Who does the music you use?
richardhead 3 years ago
That's my music. I make it myself. Sorry if it's not that high of quality.
somecomputergeek 3 years ago
Its very good. Can I get an mp3 of it anywhere?
richardhead 3 years ago
I like your videos. Are you aware of Aristarchos of Samos, though (& Eratosthenes)? Assuming heliocentrism is roughly correct, its disturbing to see Western mankind ditching a good model for a bad one for 2 thousand years or so, then "progressing" back to it. And I point out western because -some scientific "discoveries" firmly fixed in our mythology(like blood circulation/Harvey) were provably discovered in the East centuries earlier-in this case, Tibet.
givebirthathome 3 years ago
No, I've never heard of Aristarchos of Samos.
I agree that there have been many technological achievements in the past that have forgotten histories. What are you getting at?
somecomputergeek 3 years ago
Pretty much just that. I just wanted to point out that the "used to be" time when the earth was flat was not the clear cut progression we think it was.
The ancient greeks roughly accurately calculated the circumference of the earth, and Aristarchos knew the earth went around the sun, this wasn't a Copernican discovery as we have been taught.
givebirthathome 3 years ago
Sorry about the Typo. The First Nation's whose mythology you quote would have had no contact with a Tortoise. The turtles they would have been familiar with would have been North American fresh water species.
Although the word "turtle" is widely used to describe all members of the order Testudines, to avoid confusion, the word chelonian is popular among veterinarians, scientists, and conservationists working with these animals.
I LOVED YOUR VIDEO BY THE WAY!
ECOFROG2 3 years ago
Thanks. I just looked up "chelonian", and it looks like its the same thing as Testudines, but also includes an extinct "proto-turtle" (the first known turtle?") called Australochelys.
Ahh, I love wikipedia. It makes it easy to trick people into thinking I know what I'm talking about.
somecomputergeek 3 years ago
in fact a TORTISE is pictured... Not a TORTISE... U are all wrong
ECOFROG2 3 years ago
A "TORTISE", not a "TORTISE"?
A TORTOISE (not "TORTISE") is a type of turtle.
The word "turtle" is a common term denoting all species in the order Testudines. A Tortoise, or "land turtle", is any species in the family Testudinidae, and contains several genera, including Geochelone, Gopherus, and Testudo, among others.
somecomputergeek 3 years ago
this video is flawed and false.
In fact, god IS a turtle.
mauroprovatos 3 years ago 4
"In fact, god IS a turtle."
And I am God, therefore I am a turtle!
catalyst8 3 years ago 4
woot 4 turtles
scienceminded 3 years ago 2
i like turtles
buttface1202 3 years ago 2
LOL turtles For The Win Nice video dude Nicely done.
dragoonthief 3 years ago
All praise A'tuan! The great turtle! Oh wait, thats a fantasy boo... oh we are talking about the bible.... All praise A'tuan!
naughtypagan72 3 years ago 2
Nice
DonExodus2 3 years ago
FANTASTIC
You need to be seen more
Your videos could use some publicity, I'm surprised they haven't attracted it already.
Mozza314 4 years ago 3
Thanks. Any ideas as to how I can get that publicity?
somecomputergeek 4 years ago
Make these as video replies to other prominent youtuber's videos.
Di66en6ion 4 years ago 4
Awesome video as always, thank you for posting.
KameWaOni 4 years ago 2
u did this very clearverly i crongadulate you, this is really good
cenasux12 4 years ago 2
I miss socratesone. Anyone know why he was suspended?
themadhair 4 years ago
He was suspended because of this video:
ultimatedeity. com/satan
somecomputergeek 4 years ago
He got banned for that?
I thought it funny.
themadhair 4 years ago
awesomeness!!
xJediHowieX 4 years ago
I really like you style of making videos. It's not often one sees slick production values like this mixed with great content. My hat is off to you...
DavidRandallCurtis 4 years ago
On the turtle matter: Ever read any of Terry Pratchett's Disc World stuff?
Ratbas 4 years ago
So these turtles - did God create them or did they evolve from simpler life forms?
spaceagebachelor 4 years ago
I believe they were sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure.
somecomputergeek 4 years ago
I read about the turtles in "A brief story of time" but it never struck me that God had to the one holding the bottom turtle.
"Because it made sense... at the time"
Interesting turning of events. Good View^^
lifeandwater 4 years ago
I was using "god" in a more metaphorical sense. I suppose I should have said "the supernatural", but the most common source of supernatural phenomenon is God, so I think it makes sense.
somecomputergeek 4 years ago
Yes. When i refer to "God" i do not mean "Yahweh" rather "The supernatural who created it all" (as you meant)
I did understand your meaning of the word God - and i considered editing/reply to my post correcting myself - as it sounds i refer to Yahweh.
The word God ought to be used metaphorical as you do:) God (Yahweh) is not God, God (Yahweh) is one of the many supernatural beings that we describe as a/the god.
lifeandwater 4 years ago
(I am of course just stating the obvious - as you already have told all the things I re-stated in my reply)
lifeandwater 4 years ago