How is the FSM any more absurd than the Christian God?

Oh, come on.

Look, as mistaken as I think scientific investigation of religion is - this is my bias - can we just stop with the fucking FSM? It's fallacious. It was always meant as fallacious. Darwin alive, enough with the intellectual double-dealing, here. It's not helpful.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And Scientology was meant as a money-generating scheme. That doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of people who completely ignore that fact and take their faith very seriously. All it takes is for one suitably charismatic person to make a case for a deity, and that deity becomes "real." The Golden Plates of Mormonism, for example.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, but the people that follow Scientology are psychos. They believe it because they're massively fucked in the head. Does this comparison then not mean that those boosting the FSM are the same?

What the hell do we need the FSM for anyway? What's it proving that one cant argue just by saying the Abrahamic religions are objectively unrooted?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yeah Scientologists are crazy for believing in aliens and all that garbage. Now a talking snake and virgins giving birth to kids that can walk on water, that shit just makes sense!

 

Not exaactly the contrast under discussion.

 

Actually I've deleted my comment, I don't want to get in an argument with you. Your replies are too long to read.

 

You know, you recently chastised me for saying that Islam is a poisonous faith, and yet here you are broadly generalizing Scientologists. Look, I don't disagree that the tenets are absolutely ridiculous, but I think you'll find that most Scientologists are no different than believers of any other faith. Go watch some testimonials from ex-believers (they're usually celebrities), and you'll change your mind.

That's like asking why we need satire. Come on.

 

What do we need FSM for?

So that people that know better can have a laugh at the expense of those that don't.

It doesn't benefit the ones being laughed at in any way, but that's okay, not everything is for them.

 

This is a cornerstone of my argumentative work. Be afraid.

Very well: point taken. I apologize to any Scientologists that were insulted by my unobjective comments. (Still...generally really a cult, isn't it? And no one really believes in the FSM.) If the FSM is being used as satire, it carries this inherent implication that it lands some kind of parsimonious point with respect to other religions. It doesn't, though: it's just a knowingly false construct. As a semi-theist, it strikes me as pointless and insulting to consider it on par. There are better points that can be made.

Eh. I'd use it as a point of satire to ridicule FSMologists, because I just don't agree it works in its originally intended niche. If you disagree, then we just disagree.

Respects,

Geoff

 

Will the irony never end ...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

lol

 

Oh, but to acknowledge this would be the end of satire!

And we can't have that, can we.

 

Big questions such as?

I agree.

And what we can know, among other things, is that there are many people who claim to believe in God.

The natural sciences are not even conducive to investigating our own mind, our own intentions. Knowing our own mind, our intentions is rather crucial in life.

 

You misunderstand me. I don't cry foul because I think you're insulting anyone. I bring this up only because it's inaccurate. (full disclosure: I did not agree with you that only fundamentalist Islam was poisonous to society)

Well, they're all cults, or at least began as such. If this isn't an argument against Christianity or Islam, then it can't really be an argument against Scientology.

And no, so far as I know, nobody really believes in the FSM. But maybe someone will. You never know. But that's not the point. No one has to believe in it for it to work as a satire.

The key qualifier here is "As a semi-theist..." which implies that your perception of insult is based on your belief that there is something like a god responsible for the universe (I'm assuming this is what you mean by semi-theist, but please correct me if I"m wrong). This is as opposed to finding it "pointless and insulting" based on some general objective observation.

That Pastafarianism is a "knowingly false construct" does nothing to discount it as satire. Many parodies or satires feature fictional stand-ins for the thing being parodied or satirized. Think of the Ig Noble Prize in science.

Fair enough, I guess. At least you admitted your opinions are based on your "semi-theism."

 

How am I treating FSM incorrectly?

 

Yes best not to investigate your comment futher. The fact that it's based on incorrect assumptions may prove to show it to be a little bit misdirected.

 

What evidence do you have that the Christian God was intended to be satire?