What is the 'flying spaghetti monster'? Also, what is a "straw man" argument?

Question

The flying speggetti monster, the purple unicorns, and lepricauns are all "straw man" arguments.

Answer 1

Flying Spaghetti Monster.[1] The religion was founded in 2005 by Oregon State University physics graduate Bobby Henderson to protest against the decision by the Kansas State Board of Education to require the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to biological evolution. In an open letter sent to the education board, Henderson professes belief in a supernatural Creator called the Flying Spaghetti Monster which resembles spaghetti and meatballs.[2] He furthermore calls for the "Pastafarian" theory of creation to be taught in science classrooms.[3]

Due to its recent popularity and media exposure, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is used by atheists, agnostics (known by Pastafarians as "spagnostics"), and others as a modern version of Russell's teapot.[4]



A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

Answer 2

Flying Spaghetti Monster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

Straw Man Argument: A fallacy argument. This is where the argu-er takes their opponent's views and distorts them. They then argue against the distorted views.

EXAMPLE:
A bill is being argued. The bill will raise taxes in the area in order to create better schooling for high schoolers.

A: I don't think the bill should be passed because it raises taxes for many people. There are many other ways that we can raise money for high schools in the area.

B: Obviously, A doesn't care whether high schoolers get good grades or not.

B's reaction is a Straw Man Argument.


I hope this helps!

Answer 3

No. the FSM, purple unicorns and leprechauns are used as an analogy. I've never seen anyone say that fundamentalist Christians believe in the FSM, purple unicorns OR leprechauns.

I have however, seen fundamentalist Christians -- especially Creationists -- say 'evolutionists' (sic) believe plenty of equally odd things.

Your argument is itself a straw man. You set up a false correlation and then attempt to knock it down.

It hasn't worked.

Answer 4

Negative.

A straw man argument is saying that your opponent is taking a position which they are not. So if I said that Christians believe in the FSM and that is wacky, that would be a straw man.

That is different than asking what evidence the Christian God has that is different than the FSM. See, I never said that a Christian believed in it, I am only siteing a parallel example.

Answer 5

Atheists, when asked by Christians, Muslims and Jews, (AKA the Abrahamic faiths),

"How can you NOT believe in almighty God?" usually answer:

"I've never SEEN a god, nor have I ever seen a fairy, a unicorn, a demon or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. (FSM) I believe what I see with my own two eyes and there's no such thing as a god or allah or jehovah. They're just man-made figments of imagination like Santa Claus is."

They talk about these a lot in the evening and night.
.

Answer 6

No, they aren't.

A straw man argument is when a person misrepresents his opponents arguments and them "disproves" the misrepresentation.

For instance:

"If men evolved from monkeys, as evolutionists claim, why are there still monkeys?" Since evolutionists don't claim that men evolved from monkeys, this is a straw man argument.

Answer 7

Flying Spaghetti Monster-a 'god' that is obviously not real-a sarcastic response atheists and agnostics use to refute (mostly) Christian arguments
straw man argument-an argument that is easily
'knocked down' (IE-disproven)

Answer 8

Actually, it is a common way of showing "non-uniqueness" of any religion who claims to worship "the one and only true deity".

It isn't a straw man argument at all; it is a proof by contradiction.

The only assumption that is "knocked down" is the assumption that the Christian God is the only possible deity.......this isn't a straw man at all, that is standard Christian belief.

Answer 9

i'm neither a Christian nor an atheist, so permit me attempt to take an purpose crack at this. whether genuine or imagined, if in a guy or woman's subjective adventure they adventure a God, then that have shapes their reality. i discover it no longer project-free to no longer have confidence in my Gods... because of the fact I actual have experienced them. And it extremely is the fashion of reports that i discover no longer project-free to question; like while i'm in an inventive frenzy, crammed with suggestion, i do no longer stop to question which colorings I blend or what variety of brush I seize; or once I actual have my toddlers in my palms and that i nurse them, i do no longer question the bond i think. i do no longer stop and demand on a cat test or a hormone point verify to ascertain if those thoughts/reports are only illusions-- organic and organic applications, nurons firing, etc. as unfavourable to what they sense want to me. helpful you may likely arise with various different plausible factors and throw them at me for my inventive trances, or my bond with my babies, or my relationship with my Gods-- psychological, physiological, organic and organic, conditioning, etc. regardless of... yet to me, in the way I adventure reality, my Gods are as genuine as all people or something I adventure. So regardless of in the event that they do no longer exist, which I totally properly known is plausible, I nonetheless could stay my life as though they do. you do no longer deny the invisible triangle being a distant threat-- yet then, you have no longer experienced it; you have no longer had reports with it, it has no longer moved you, it has no longer touched you, it has no longer performed some thing to alter you or something significant on your life (genuine or imagined); you do no longer have confidence you have felt it or heard it or that that is hand has guided you or that that is ever made touch to you. So for sure, you're no longer approximately to re-organize your life for it. I settle for that there is the miniscule hazard Bigfoot exists, yet i do no longer re-organize my life (or maybe my tenting journeys) because of the fact of that distant threat. If, even nonetheless, you have had some very meaning, shifting, marvelous reports that your recommendations only can't wrap around, that no longer in basic terms do you think of that's the invisible triangle, yet you come across it no longer project-free to DOUBT the invisible triangle anymore, then you definately could come across a metamorphosis in the way you habit your self and relate to it (whether genuine or imagined).

Answer 10

Actually, they aren't. As you would know after a class in debate and logic.

For them to be straw men, they would have to make a claim DIFFERENT from what the actual point is, and attack that. FSM and IPU are both making identical claims as those of religions.