Turtles All the Way Down
Evangelical Outpost writes an excerpt from "A Brief History of Time"
where an old lady tells an scientist giving a lecture that the world is
a flat plate resting on the back of a giant tortoise. The scientist
then asks, "What is the tortoise standing on?" and the woman replied
back, "...it's turtles all the way down." Then the author of the post
continues on to name his own "turtles" and thus, I believe, missing the
entire point of the allegory.
The point of the story is to show the lady making a preposterous claim , and when challenged, she haughtily replies a solution, because she of course has it all figured out. It alludes, however, to the possibility that perhaps the scientist himself is making equally preposterous claims, and is just as crazy as the lady. This view, however, can be remedied if the question of evidence is brought into light; who is more justified in making their claim?
The "turtles all the way down" portion is alluding to the non-termination of the idea of "God" creating the universe. What made God? How did God happen? Likewise, ask a scientist about what made the energy for the Big Bang, and you find yourself in pretty much the same "turtles all the way down" syndrome. However, once again, we can ask who has more evidence to back up their claim, and then act accordingly based upon that. To give a hint, one is falsifiable, one is not.
Everyone has presuppositions and many are unwilling to show them to light and I would argue especially true of those of religious persuasion as this is detrimental to the strength of their claims. Furthermore, I believe the author of referenced post doesn't get wholly what "presupposition" is, because they make many claims with knowledge gained from experience in the evangelical world.
The point of the story is to show the lady making a preposterous claim , and when challenged, she haughtily replies a solution, because she of course has it all figured out. It alludes, however, to the possibility that perhaps the scientist himself is making equally preposterous claims, and is just as crazy as the lady. This view, however, can be remedied if the question of evidence is brought into light; who is more justified in making their claim?
The "turtles all the way down" portion is alluding to the non-termination of the idea of "God" creating the universe. What made God? How did God happen? Likewise, ask a scientist about what made the energy for the Big Bang, and you find yourself in pretty much the same "turtles all the way down" syndrome. However, once again, we can ask who has more evidence to back up their claim, and then act accordingly based upon that. To give a hint, one is falsifiable, one is not.
Everyone has presuppositions and many are unwilling to show them to light and I would argue especially true of those of religious persuasion as this is detrimental to the strength of their claims. Furthermore, I believe the author of referenced post doesn't get wholly what "presupposition" is, because they make many claims with knowledge gained from experience in the evangelical world.
Presuppositions are a dangerous scaffolding to erect a world view upon.
They are weak, unfounded, and untested. The idea that you can make
suppositions about the world without attempting to gain any knowledge
is without merit, as you are building up on a house of cards. However,
many people find them like a creed and follow them blindly and accept
others presuppositions without skepticism.
Presuppositions are at best a starting block for further investigation and knowledge. They aren't the things one builds upon. They are the rudimentary plans for the design of the world view. One can look at presuppositions as a hypothesis and they must test it to see if it is valid. Beliefs should be based on the results of this investigation, not on the presuppositions themselves!
To illustrate this point further I could tell of a scientist who believes the moon is made of cheese. Now, he is making this claim as a presupposition. Would he then go on and attempt to build upon this guess and continue on writing papers based on this assumption? Of course not. He would investigate this original presupposition and upon discovering its falsehood modify his beliefs accordingly.
The presuppositions given by the author illustrate knowledge garnered, mostly, from his experience. I think it is safe to assume that based on these presuppositions he has already built up an elaborate system of belief about the world and lets them guide his actions in it. All upon guesses. What a compromising position!
The ultimate problem with many of these guesses is that they are not falsifiable. Logically this should be a red flag, but these beliefs are not based upon any logic. They are based upon learned behavior and ideas expounded by his own ideas and experience in light of these learned behaviors. In other words, he believes the moon is cheese, and already has gone out of his way to write paper after paper expanding on this presupposition.
The problem I see, overall, is that the author claims that the presuppositions outlined are a "useful starting point for examining my foundational beliefs." The cynical part of me believes that this is not the case. The cynical part of me believes his relayed presuppositions are not up to question and are already cemented in with his world view.
I lament the fact that people would go to great lengths to make guesses then build upon them as though they are useful foundations. The fact of the matter is, they are not. They are building a foundation of sand. These presuppositions should be looked at closely at one by one. If they are found to hold, then they can be suppositions used for building a world view on. I don't see how it could be any other way.
Presuppositions are at best a starting block for further investigation and knowledge. They aren't the things one builds upon. They are the rudimentary plans for the design of the world view. One can look at presuppositions as a hypothesis and they must test it to see if it is valid. Beliefs should be based on the results of this investigation, not on the presuppositions themselves!
To illustrate this point further I could tell of a scientist who believes the moon is made of cheese. Now, he is making this claim as a presupposition. Would he then go on and attempt to build upon this guess and continue on writing papers based on this assumption? Of course not. He would investigate this original presupposition and upon discovering its falsehood modify his beliefs accordingly.
The presuppositions given by the author illustrate knowledge garnered, mostly, from his experience. I think it is safe to assume that based on these presuppositions he has already built up an elaborate system of belief about the world and lets them guide his actions in it. All upon guesses. What a compromising position!
The ultimate problem with many of these guesses is that they are not falsifiable. Logically this should be a red flag, but these beliefs are not based upon any logic. They are based upon learned behavior and ideas expounded by his own ideas and experience in light of these learned behaviors. In other words, he believes the moon is cheese, and already has gone out of his way to write paper after paper expanding on this presupposition.
The problem I see, overall, is that the author claims that the presuppositions outlined are a "useful starting point for examining my foundational beliefs." The cynical part of me believes that this is not the case. The cynical part of me believes his relayed presuppositions are not up to question and are already cemented in with his world view.
I lament the fact that people would go to great lengths to make guesses then build upon them as though they are useful foundations. The fact of the matter is, they are not. They are building a foundation of sand. These presuppositions should be looked at closely at one by one. If they are found to hold, then they can be suppositions used for building a world view on. I don't see how it could be any other way.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Turtles All the Way Down.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.atheistpeace.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/8
Out
Leave a comment