He Created Us

12:00 PM -- School's starting up and I know some parents are fretting about what their darling little smartasses are going to learn in science class. Will they be taught the theory of evolution? Creation? Or some other theory of Intelligent Design?

I encourage parents who are worried about too much secular influence and political correctness in public schools to review the case of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM), a deity that several believe created the world and all that reside in it. Even midgets.

Here's some helpful reading on the subject:

  • Here's the June 2005 letter from Bobby Henderson, the main prophet behind the FSM, to the Kansas City School Board
  • Here's the official FSM entry in Wikipedia.
  • Like all worthwhile religions, this one also has an official T-shirt

    To my fellow FSM believers, there is a stripper factory and a beer volcano in Heaven awaiting us all. Keep the faith!

    — Phil Harvey, Flimsy Curriculum Editor, Light Reading

  • paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 3:04:32 AM
    re: He Created Us
    This is clearly an affront to the Elder Gods Party. Cthulhu will drive mad those who believe in this false FSM.

    Those that believe in Cthulhu will be eaten last.

    That is all.

    DCITDave 12/5/2012 | 3:04:31 AM
    re: He Created Us Okay, my brother. We can make room for Cthulhu in school lessons as well.

    But we'll have to cut back on something, as all these new theories and the required standardized testing will take some time.

    Let's chop the arts and music and recess. Sound good?

    paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 3:04:30 AM
    re: He Created Us
    From the Cthulhu perspective, school matters not at all. He is not concerned with whether those he eats are educated or not. So, cutting art, music and recess is fine. Cutting all classes is fine.

    Learning and worshipping Cthulhu is a good way of being eaten last.




    DCITDave 12/5/2012 | 3:04:28 AM
    re: He Created Us I wasn't going to worship him, but since he has his own T-shirt...
    dljvjbsl 12/5/2012 | 3:04:27 AM
    re: He Created Us http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08...

    The above points to a good article on this subject in the New York Times.

    The nub of the dispute seems to revolve around two senses of the word 'belief'. The article quotes a professor who teaches Darwinian evolution. He is asked by religious students if they have to 'believe' in evolution in order to pass the course. He points out to them that 'belief' is not part of science.

    My take on this is that the students are conflating metaphysical and moral belief with scientific knowledge. They take as their religious beliefs as the basis for their lives. They fear that a requirement to 'believe' in Darwinian evolution will deprive them of that belief and so deprive them of that which makes their lives meaningful.

    As the professor points out, science does not address this form of 'belief' at all. However these people see that 'scientism' or the belief that scientific inquiry is the basis for all knowledge is prevalent. Wikipedia provides this definition of scientism:

    Scientism is a belief that scientific knowledge is the foundation of all wisdom and that, consequently, scientific argument should always be weighted more heavily than other forms of wisdom, particularly those which are not yet well described or justified from within the rational framework, or whose description fails to present itself in the course of a debate against a scientific argument. When used in a critique of science, it is dismissed by some scientists who maintain that all fields of inquiry should be subject to (and can ultimately be understood by) standard scientific methods of investigation

    Thus it can be seen that there is a real debate. There are many in western society who agree with the tenets of scientism. They see science or reason as the basis of all wisdom. Within scientism, Darwinism is not a morally neutral scientific theory. It has implications for the development of human society. The teaching of Darwinism in a milieu in which scientism is a common view is not morally neutral. It is incompatible with the beliefs of religious people who see meaning being created in an entirely different way. The religious fear that their beliefs will be denied if they are taught in a system that is based on scientism

    Intelligent design, it seems to me, is a way that the religious are trying to come to terms with the scientism that is prevalent in society. They are dressing up metaphysical belief in scientific clothing because science is seen as the basis of all wisdom. Others who support the teaching of Darwinism do the same thing. The imbue a scientific theory with a moral value.
    Sign In