After yesterday’s post, David of Perrero fame chatted to me online. David holds a place in the pantheon of intellectuals I regularly speak to, and has the honor of being the only one I’ve never met in person. We spoke about the trends mentioned in yesterday’s post (yes, I linked to something you could just scroll down and read. Trust me, when this is all in the archives and someone if reading it, they’ll thank me) and as discussions do, one thing led to another, and inevitably, the Flying Spaghetti Monster was mentioned.
Before last night, I thought the Flying Spaghetti Monster was simply a joke on South Park. I had no idea it was an actual satire meant to criticize Kansas’ teaching of Intelligent Design.
I read up on Pastafarianism, a name that makes me snicker every time I think of it. When David said ‘Pastafarianism,’ I was sure he made a typo, or made up a word. And while the whole thing is hilarious (heaven has ‘volcanos of beer’ and ‘the Flying Spaghetti Monster changes the results of carbon dating to test our faith with his noodly appendage’), it is now being touted as a weapon against Christianity in itself.
I would go off on a rant about that, but I feel I made my point yesterday.
Intelligent Design, Creationism, Evolution, Big Bang, and now the Flying Spaghetti Monster… explainations to the origin of the universe and life. We’ll never be able to prove any of them 100% (yes, there is tons of evidence of evolution, and tons of science behind the big bang, both theories I believe in), so each of them are equally valid?
People need to realize that just because we can’t prove something, isn’t evidence of nonexistence, no more than being unable to disprove a theory is evidence of existence. And people claiming a Flying Spaghetti Monster to be analogous to Christianity in its preposterousness seem to be causing conflict for the sake of causing conflict.
Look at me, am I defending Christianity here? I’ll be the first to criticize those holier-than-thou meatheads. But inventing arguments and attacking their beliefs is hitting below the belt. Why would you go around wanting people to take you seriously when you do little more than making fun of others?
At the base of that, Intelligent Design being taught in schools. Well, I definitely agree that religion should stay out of school. And I believe that evolution has more than enough scientific grounding to be taught in school. If the people of the State of Kansas want their children to learn about religion and Intelligent Design, they are more than free to teach them and bring them to church.
So, yes, the Christians are out of line in wanting to teach religion in school.
And I can’t think about the words ‘noodly appendage’ without laughing. My co-workers are becoming concerned I’m having a seizure.
Zel-kun out.
David N. Scott | 04-May-07 at 12:34 pm | Permalink
It is pretty funny, though it’s used a bit too often on the internet (well, was say a year ago).
I never know what to think about Intelligent Design. I mean, if you compare a ‘evolution needed help’ type with a ‘the earth is 6,000 years old and all the the geologists, astronomers, biologists, etc are all LIARS’ type, then obviously you’re looking at a much more well-balanced and educated person. But the movement has a lot of cranks (or, as some suspect, is all cranks and some can hide it), so there you go.
I don’t agree with the concept of ID as a threat to Monolithic Science–it’s worth noting that Monolithic Science can be just as dangerous as the religion-based version… death in childbirth actually skyrocketed with the advent of the modern hospital because doctors didn’t want to bother to wash their hands and the science of the time believed in self-generating diseases and organisms and didn’t know about germs.
Thus, even when the ocassional reformer tried to clean up the place, Science said not to bother (much like Science continually drew upon the very innacurate writings of Greeks like Galen, even when rogue surgeons were diproving them). It wasn’t until Florence Nightingale, a high society woman, founded nursing that this began to change.
Whew. Those anecdotes are from a book that I’m reading called A Brief History of Disease, Science and Medicine, by Michael T. Kennnedy (Mike K to us Cathyites), a retured Surgeon and USC Professor. It’s not what you would call an easy read, being part of the USC Medical curriculum, but it sure is interesting.
The FSM was an absolutely deadly retort to the logic being used by IDers to change a particular school curriculum. I think as a a great refutation of all things theological it falls rather short, though. The whole ‘I’ll describe something you believe in a way that makes it sound stupid’ argument already gets enough play with the godless, appeasing liberals and fascist, theocratic neocons, if you ask me.
Pastafarianism frustrates me sometimes because you have people that advocate it so much on message boards and the like. I suppose they’re giggling on the other side of the screen and just being deadpan, but some are really insistent on it.
Of course, on only need look at the Church of the Subgenius for a “spoof” religion that has believers more fervent and involved and a stronger sense of community than many mainline denominations/churches do.
David N. Scott | 04-May-07 at 12:35 pm | Permalink
Wow, that should’ve been a post. Oh well.
And I appreciate being called an intellectual, let alone a member of a pantheon.
David N. Scott | 04-May-07 at 12:39 pm | Permalink
Argh. Comment interrupted by small child.
Clarifications:
I don’t agree with ID being bad because it is a threat to Monolithig Science. If nothing else, in my perception, evolution advocates and scientists have sharpened up their game considerable since the advent of ID, and that really is a service. People without opposition can become very lazy and self-serving.
I should’ve said Florence Nightingale, a woman of high society who demanded cleanliness and more efficient care. I mention her being of high society because I’d imagine it was one of the reasons she fixated on cleanliness. Regardless of my guesses, as the book puts it–”Florence Nightingale … is also a towering figure in the conquest of infection.”
Zel-kun | 04-May-07 at 4:33 pm | Permalink
Wow, Florence Nightingale founded nursing?
That’s pretty cool.
And with a name like Nightingale, its very probable she was of high society. Back in those days, your last name said a lot about your station in life. Oftentimes your last name was your occupation.
So Nightingale makes me think her family just really liked birds, and didn’t actually work for a living.
David N. Scott | 07-May-07 at 1:44 pm | Permalink
Very likely–her mother certainly didn’t approve of her lifestyle and wanted to marry her off (it didn’t help that she was quite beautiful by nearly all accounts).
Sabrejack | 27-Jul-07 at 11:24 pm | Permalink
Old post, I know.. but I thought I’d mention that those chuckling Pastafarians are indeed playing it deadpan to you. It would obviously be ridiculous to believe the universe was created by flying spaghetti.
And hopefully.. after encountering enough people who SURELY must be joking, you start to get a little perspective about how it feels to be atheist.