Quote:
The fsm has narrow utility as an argument against theism but gets used as if it is a broad counterargument by those incapable of understanding its limitations. In addition it is intentionally mocking. So if you run into someone who insists on using it, you are dealing with someone who is more interested in being insulting than having a discussion and is not very bright as well. The real question quickly becomes: Why am I talking to you?
Again, all this would be resolved if it just had
more satire.
The problem with FSM now is that it is too close to the real deal to count as proper satire, thus it becomes an insult. Good satire stings too much to be ignored, but must be too silly to cause rage. The point is to raise legitimate criticism without provoking unjustified reactions.
Proper satire is very delicate...to the extent that cultural shifts might even make most people oblivious to it even being satire (for example "Gulliver's travels").
I like Russel's teapot more, because it has an added level of absurdity.