Difference between revisions of "Flying Spaghetti Monster"
(recover from edit conflict) |
m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Parodist Henderson then constructed a theory which (he argued), if accepted as science, could be considered a better scientific theory than intelligent design. | Parodist Henderson then constructed a theory which (he argued), if accepted as science, could be considered a better scientific theory than intelligent design. | ||
| − | The parody began as a critique of the [[Kansas Board of Education]]'s actions involving [[Intelligent Design]] and the notion of "teaching the controversy" by constructing a new theological system and | + | The parody began as a critique of the [[Kansas Board of Education]]'s actions involving [[Intelligent Design]] and the notion of "teaching the controversy" by constructing a new theological system and arguing that such a construct could fit notions attributed to proponents of [[Intelligent Design]].<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/27/AR2005082700019.html?nav=most_emailed Verbatim: Noodle This, Kansas - Washington Post]</ref>. |
As the argument goes, the decision by the Kansas Board of Education redefines science as "natural" explanation to science as "logical" explanation. | As the argument goes, the decision by the Kansas Board of Education redefines science as "natural" explanation to science as "logical" explanation. | ||
Revision as of 10:53, April 12, 2007
The Flying Spaghetti Monster parody was created to mock the teaching of Intelligent Design in Kansas science classrooms. [1]
Parodist Henderson then constructed a theory which (he argued), if accepted as science, could be considered a better scientific theory than intelligent design.
The parody began as a critique of the Kansas Board of Education's actions involving Intelligent Design and the notion of "teaching the controversy" by constructing a new theological system and arguing that such a construct could fit notions attributed to proponents of Intelligent Design.[2].
As the argument goes, the decision by the Kansas Board of Education redefines science as "natural" explanation to science as "logical" explanation.
ID opponents argue that Intelligent Design claims to explain the origin of life, and contrast this "claim" with Pastafarian claims to explain Global Warming, gravity and UFOs.
Self-professed believers have called themselves "Pastafarians" (reference to FSM's "noodly appendages").
FSM is used by atheists, such as Richard Dawkins[Citation Needed], as a modern version of Russell's teapot.
A book was released in 2006, to explain most of the idea.[3]