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

lightgigantic said:
You don't find the notion of atheists believing in (a personal) god unusual?
Click to expand...

There are no such atheists, by definition.

What is it that you think you're implying?

Why do you make such a show of refusing to present any clear, positive line of reasoning - even when asked directly - and why should anyone regard that behavior as anything other than a cheap troll tactic?

lightgigantic said:
I tend to stand by statements that people actually make as opposed to inventing stances for them to launch my criticisms from
Click to expand...

Is that what you think?

Meanwhile, since you're consistently so obtuse as to beg the question of what in the hell you mean to imply, you leave interlocutors little option but to try to fill in the blanks.

Anyway, I've invited you to address any misconceptions you encounter. You've declined, and exhibited a preference for sniping instead. Like I said: evading the point, in order to troll.
 
lightgigantic

actually it would require more, since it is exclusively advocated by atheists
Click to expand...

Funny, it is only Christians advocating for the Christian god. Neither has any effect on the validity of the position, it is either valid or it is not based on the evidence and logic, no matter who puts it forward. You could make an argument about the motives and sincerity of the Atheists making the FSM argument, but you still haven't addressed the argument itself, just it's authors motives.

wynn

No argument ever stands indepedently of the motives of the person who makes it.
Click to expand...

Utter non-sense. Positions are put forward for many motives, the position either stands or it falls independent of the motives of the person putting it forward. If it is non-sense, motives won't change that. If it is valid it is valid regardless of the motivations of the one who presented it.

Grumpy:cool:
 
lightgigantic said:
then I guess you have the means to entertain absolutely anything regardless of whatever evidence picks you up by the neck and slaps you across the face

:shrug:
Click to expand...

It depends what kind of evidence we are talking about. Is there any evidence that something made up can't also be real?
 
quadraphonics said:
There are no such atheists, by definition.
Click to expand...
fancy that, eh?

What is it that you think you're implying?
Click to expand...
what is it that you are failing to read?

YOU: The assertion in question is that doing so would not require any greater embrace of absurdity than would believing in the Christian God.
”
ME :actually it would require more, since it is exclusively advocated by atheists .. who aren't particularly famous for their broadness of acceptance of the general principle.



Why do you make such a show of refusing to present any clear, positive line of reasoning - even when asked directly - and why should anyone regard that behavior as anything other than a cheap troll tactic?
Click to expand...
I don't know how much clearer I can be.

On one hand you can accept that atheists by definition don't believe in god and on the other you can't see the clear absurdity of having an atheist believe in god

:shrug:



Is that what you think?

Meanwhile, since you're consistently so obtuse as to beg the question of what in the hell you mean to imply, you leave interlocutors little option but to try to fill in the blanks.

Anyway, I've invited you to address any misconceptions you encounter. You've declined, and exhibited a preference for sniping instead. Like I said: evading the point, in order to troll.
Click to expand...
If you spent as much as much time reading what people say as opposed to imagining it we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
:shrug:
 
lightgigantic said:
On one hand you can accept that atheists by definition don't believe in god and on the other you can't see the clear absurdity of having an atheist believe in god
Click to expand...

So your argument is that the FSM is a more absurd proposition than the Christian God, because it is contradictory for an atheist to believe in the FSM?

If so, then it seems that my real error was in greatly overestimating you. Because that is as inane an exercise in point-missing as I have ever encountered. I've already explained exactly how the FSM rhetoric does and does not work to you, in this thread. And yet you insist on attacking this strawman of atheists-who-believe-in-God, followed by the illogical insistence that such has some bearing on the absurdity (or not) of the conception of said God.

Given all that, there's little left to do but deploy the same flourish I already visited upon wynn: in your rush to construct a cheap pretext from which to assert that the FSM is more absurd than the Christian God, you have not only conceded but insisted that deities are human constructs. So, nice own-goal there, and have fun inventing some new inanity in an attempt to squirm out of the corner you've painted yourself into.
 
quadraphonics said:
So your argument is that the FSM is a more absurd proposition than the Christian God, because it is contradictory for an atheist to believe in the FSM?
Click to expand...
yeah sure


If so, then it seems that my real error was in greatly overestimating you. Because that is as inane an exercise in point-missing as I have ever encountered. I've already explained exactly how the FSM rhetoric does and does not work to you, in this thread. And yet you insist on attacking this strawman of atheists-who-believe-in-God, followed by the illogical insistence that such has some bearing on the absurdity (or not) of the conception of said God.
Click to expand...
an idea that only finds an advocate amongst persons diametrically opposed to it is a good basis for humour.

I'm not sure why you can't understand this, since its clear that any atheist who begins talking about the existence of the FSM sure does

:shrug:



Given all that, there's little left to do but deploy the same flourish I already visited upon wynn: in your rush to construct a cheap pretext from which to assert that the FSM is more absurd than the Christian God, you have not only conceded but insisted that deities are human constructs. So, nice own-goal there, and have fun inventing some new inanity in an attempt to squirm out of the corner you've painted yourself into.
Click to expand...
Once again your imagination has landed itself in the driver's seat
:shrug:
 
lightgigantic said:
an idea that only finds an advocate amongst persons diametrically opposed to it is a good basis for humour.

I'm not sure why you can't understand this, since its clear that any atheist who begins talking about the existence of the FSM sure does
Click to expand...

We do not disagree on the question of whether the FSM is a funny social phenomenon, although presumably we do disagree on the reasons for that. I find it funny because the advocates in question are mocking the likes of yourself, in an incisive and colorful manner. You claim to find it funny because you refuse to aknowledge that they are mocking you, interpret their professions of belief as sincere, and then point to the contradiction. Which, by the way, isn't actually "humor," but rather "derision." And a fairly obviously insecure "I'll turn the tables and show you!" kind of derision, at that.

Anyway, what we were actually talking about whether ithe FSM is more absurd of a conception of a deity than the Christian God. Your attempts to draw a line from said humor to the actual question remain a hash.

lightgigantic said:
Once again your imagination has landed itself in the driver's seat
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Your desire to avoid the implications of your position is just that, as far as I'm concerned.
 
Last edited:
quadraphonics said:
We do not disagree on the question of whether the FSM is a funny social phenomenon, although presumably we do disagree on the reasons for that. I find it funny because the advocates in question are mocking the likes of yourself, in an incisive and colorful manner. You claim to find it funny because you refuse to aknowledge that they are mocking you, interpret their professions of belief as sincere, and then point to the contradiction. Which, by the way, isn't actually "humor," but rather "derision." And a fairly obviously insecure "I'll turn the tables and show you!" kind of derision, at that.
Click to expand...
i think its funny when atheists pretend to take the FSM seriously for the sake of rendering a more sturdy strawman

Anyway, what we were actually talking about whether ithe FSM is more absurd of a conception of a deity than the Christian God. Your attempts to draw a line from said humor to the actual question remain a hash.
Click to expand...
so once again, if you can understand that it is only advocated by persons who think it is absurd in the first instance the only thing that is unclear is why we are having this discussion ...
:shrug:



Yeah, sure. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Your desire to avoid the implications of your position is just that, as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...
Its more that I don't waste my time defending things others simply imagine I said
:shrug:
 
lightgigantic

i think its funny when atheists pretend to take the FSM seriously for the sake of rendering a more sturdy strawman
Click to expand...

No Atheist even pretends to take the FSM seriously, it is SATIRE, it is DERISION, it illustrates the point that all god concepts are made up out of whole cloth(the supernatural claptrap part of it), whether in ancient Judea, in Hollywood or in Salt Lake City. They are all equally fallacious concepts, equally unsupportable, equally non-falsifiable, equally "real"(as in not). None of them present themselves when reality is examined logically based on the evidence. You can't catch a particular god virus except by exposure to someone who already has it, regressing all the way back to the inventor of that meme, usually an ignorant goatherd with too much time to think and a vivid imagination(and a serious authoritarian complex or ergot poisoning). The FSM is exactly as real as Jehova is, or Allah. IE, gods do not have any more evidence of their existence than does the Prince of Pasta. Holy water is no more holy than the Parmesean dusting of his noodly appendages. Baptism does not signify any more than ladling the sauce upon your head, with meatballs. The FSM is not real, it does not exist, he is a creation of man's imagination, but then so is your god. And the sillyness claimed about FSM is in no qualitative characteristic any more silly than the claims about the Christian god.

FSM is not a strawman, it is a stalking horse. It is a construct specifically designed to mimic real religious beliefs with ludicrous and silly concepts easily seen as false. It is put forward to be torn apart by logic and to be seen to be invalid(and by extention, expose religion as equally invalid).

Grumpy:cool:
 
Grumpy said:
Utter non-sense. Positions are put forward for many motives, the position either stands or it falls independent of the motives of the person putting it forward. If it is non-sense, motives won't change that. If it is valid it is valid regardless of the motivations of the one who presented it.
Click to expand...

Just keep repeating to yourself

I, Grmupy, am not taking part in this conversation.
I, Grmupy, am not taking part in this conversation.
I, Grmupy, am not taking part in this conversation.
 
lightgigantic said:
Its more that I don't waste my time defending things others simply imagine I said
Click to expand...

Granted. There are, however, things that can reasonably be inferred from what a person has said or from the fact that they have said it.

Don't you think it would behoove you to address those inferences?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top