Is the Flying Spaghetti Monster Good for Skepticism?

I've always been a big fan of reductio ad absurdum arguments. It's often difficult to directly explain just why "you can't prove it doesn't exist" is a bad argument. It's much more clear when you use their logic to show something supremely silly, which is what the FSM does.
 
I see a lot of claims about what the FSM can do for skepticism. What I do not see is a shred of evidence. Hell, not even a good anecdote yet.

How deliciously ironic.
 
Ahh, now that is a good point. It is, however, a problem with any kind of philosophical argument - how, precisely, does one quantify the effects of the FSM? Do we conduct a survey of ex-Christians?

Did you leave your faith because:

a) You were bored.
b) You had fundamental philosophical differences with theology.
c) You didn't want to be religious on days that end in -y.
d) Delicious, delicious spaghetti.

To be totally clear, I'm not saying that the FSM *will* or *does* have a good impact on skepticism. All I'm saying is that it *can*, and I think that if it's properly applied, it will be as useful as Sagan's Dragon or the proverbial invisible pink unicorn.

And in a worst case scenario, it's a good excuse to dress up as a pirate, eat spaghetti, and dream of a stripper factory yet to come...


Marquis de Carabas said:
I see a lot of claims about what the FSM can do for skepticism. What I do not see is a shred of evidence. Hell, not even a good anecdote yet.

How deliciously ironic.
Click to expand...
 
SusanB-M1 said:
(By the way, please could somebody tell me how you can tell that this is a response to the first post in this topic?)
Click to expand...

The easiest way to be specific about which post you're responding to is to use the "quote" button for your response. If the original post is long and you don't want to quote it all or don't want to respond to the whole thing, you can edit out the parts you're not responding to. Just remember to keep the "quote" tags at beginning and end (the parts that are in square brackets), so the quoted part will be set off properly in your response. Preview it if there's any doubt about formatting.
 
On a side-note, Bing Crosby was a Pastafarian. Evidence:

"Every time it rains it rains
Penne from heaven.
Don't you know each cloud contains
Penne from heaven?"
 
RandomEngy said:
I've always been a big fan of reductio ad absurdum arguments. It's often difficult to directly explain just why "you can't prove it doesn't exist" is a bad argument. It's much more clear when you use their logic to show something supremely silly, which is what the FSM does.
Click to expand...

Isn't reducto ad absurdum in the category of flawed arguments? If so, it shouldn't be a successful way to convince someone away from faith using reason. Perhaps as a way of using woo to fight woo?
 
I don't really see the point in relabelling, for attempt at ridicule, one of the deepest feelings that people in all cultures have.

It just makes Brights look petty, IMO, when they do things like this because they could be using their thinking for better arguments (for actual arguments!)
 
T'ai Chi said:
I don't really see the point in relabelling, for attempt at ridicule, one of the deepest feelings that people in all cultures have.

It just makes Brights look petty, IMO, when they do things like this because they could be using their thinking for better arguments (for actual arguments!)
Click to expand...

I think it helps to show that, contrary to popular belief, atheists CAN have a sense of humor.

If you're that concerned with offending people, why are you referring to yourself as a "bright", with its connotations of superior intelligence?
 
Axiom_Blade said:
If you're that concerned with offending people, why are you referring to yourself as a "bright", with its connotations of superior intelligence?
Click to expand...

That WOULD be offensive. But I didn't interpret it that way. I thought he was referring to his lighter pigmentation which correlates positively with relative likelihood not to believe in supersitious mumbo jumbo. :p
 
dogjones said:
On a side-note, Bing Crosby was a Pastafarian. Evidence:

"Every time it rains it rains
Penne from heaven.
Don't you know each cloud contains
Penne from heaven?"
Click to expand...

Noted. Into the Hymnal.

Pesto be with you, brother.
 
dogjones said:
On a side-note, Bing Crosby was a Pastafarian. Evidence:

"Every time it rains it rains
Penne from heaven.
Don't you know each cloud contains
Penne from heaven?"
Click to expand...

I guess it's been done before, but "Gnocchi on Heaven's Door"...
 
thomps1d said:
I disagree fairly vehemently with this point of view. I'm of the opinion that the FSM is actually a strong tool in favour of skepticism. To be sure, there will be those who feel alienated by His Noodly Appendagehood, but most of those will be the through-and-through fundamentalist crowd whose beliefs cannot be swayed no matter what argument you use.
Click to expand...
Even though I've really been reconsidering my views on how we should act as skeptics, I'm behind you 100% on that. Instead of attacking their beliefs, the FSM is a creative, absurd, and funny story. If this ridiculous parody makes someone uncomfortable because they feel it resembles their beliefs too closely, I think that sad state of affairs says a lot more about that person and their beliefs than it does about the FSM.
 
Bronze Dog said:
I think we should see about combining the IPU with Pastafarianism. Maybe get in lots of faux arguments about why the other is the Devil or something.
Click to expand...

A horn and hooves - what more proof could you possibly want?


satan2.jpg
unicorn.jpg
 
delphi_ote said:
Even though I've really been reconsidering my views on how we should act as skeptics, I'm behind you 100% on that. Instead of attacking their beliefs, the FSM is a creative, absurd, and funny story. If this ridiculous parody makes someone uncomfortable because they feel it resembles their beliefs too closely, I think that sad state of affairs says a lot more about that person and their beliefs than it does about the FSM.
Click to expand...

Exactly mate

These people are pretty much doomed to live within their own little box of beliefs, barring some sort of crisis of faith which helps them see through their conditioning. And hey, if they're happy in their own little world and don't try to force it on me or anyone I know, then all the more power to them - I don't care if everyone on earth is Touched by His Noodly Appendage, so long as nobody is forcing their beliefs upon anybody else.
Click to expand...

For me religion is dangerous to the development of the human race, regardless of whether its forced on me or not.

My two cents

Cheers
 
isn't this the same as believing in a tea cup god that circles the solar system?

A much better question is why waste time with looneys?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom