Invisible Pink Unicorn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A popular depiction of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, in the style of a heraldic animal rampant, though the nearest heraldic color to pink is purpure (purple).
Enlarge
A popular depiction of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, in the style of a heraldic animal rampant, though the nearest heraldic color to pink is purpure (purple).

The Invisible Pink Unicorn (IPU) is the goddess of a satiric parody religion aimed at theistic beliefs, which takes the form of a unicorn that is paradoxically both invisible and pink.[1] These attributes serve to satirize the apparent contradictions in properties which some attribute to a theistic God.[2]

The IPU is commonly used to highlight the perceived fallacious or arbitrary nature of supernatural beliefs by, for example, replacing the word "God" in any theistic statement with "Invisible Pink Unicorn".[3] A quote from the alt.atheism FAQ sums up this use of the Invisible Pink Unicorn:

The point of this silliness is to prod the theist into remembering that their preaching is likely to be viewed by atheists as having all the credibility and seriousness of [the atheists'] preaching about the IPU.[4]

It is accepted that there are no actual believers in this mock goddess, but it has become popular, especially on atheist web sites and on-line discussion forums, to feign belief in her both for the sake of humor and as a form of critique or satire of theistic belief. These professions of faith also serve to demonstrate the difficulty of refuting avowals of belief in phenomena outside human perception.[5][6]

Contents

[edit] History

The IPU seems to have become notable primarily through on-line culture: in addition to alt.atheism, where IPU still frequently comes up in discussions, there are now a number of web sites dedicated to her. The earliest known written references to IPU are from between 1990 and 1992 on the Usenet discussion group alt.atheism. Other sources concerning IPU state that she was "revealed to us" on alt.atheism. However, others have reported hearing of her in spoken discussions prior to the first mentions in the newsgroup, and it is probable that IPU was part of spoken culture for some time before 1990.[citation needed]

The concept was further developed by a group of college students from 1994 to 1995 on the ISCA Telnet-based BBS. The students created a manifesto[7] that detailed a nonsensical, yet internally consistent, religion based on a multitude of invisible pink unicorns. It is from this document that the most famous quotation concerning IPUs originated:

"Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. We know this because they are capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them." --Steve Eley

Eley's manifesto also spelled out the more whimsical articles of faith concerning IPUs, such as a fondness for raisin bread (which symbolizes the expanding universe) and the association with lost socks. Eley dubbed himself the "Chief Advocate and Spokesguy" of the religion, naming a succession of others High Priest or Priestess (HP), in accordance with a stated theory that the one who writes the gospels is really the one with all the power in any religion, and is never the one martyred. [citation needed] The first of these HPs was Natalie Overstreet, who popularized the above quotation in her Usenet sig.[8]

Another member of the ISCA board, Wes Schrader, attempted to carry out a religious schism by founding a "Cult of the Very Stealthy Maroon Pegasus". His revolution was largely unsuccessful.[citation needed]

In 1996 a similar concept - a unicorn that no one can see - was adapted as a teaching device at Camp Quest, the first freethought summer camp for kids established in the United States. As reported years later in the July 21, 2006, Cincinnati Enquirer, "Campers must try to prove that imaginary unicorns—as a metaphor for God—don't exist."[9]

Richard Dawkins alluded to the Invisible Pink Unicorn in his 2006 book The God Delusion, saying "Russell's teapot, of course, stands for an infinite number of things whose existence is conceivable and cannot be disproved. A philosophical favorite is the invisible, intangible, inaudible unicorn."

[edit] Dogma

This image features a pink unicorn, but it has an alpha channel that makes the image completely transparent, thus approximating the appearance of the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Blank images have been presented as depictions of the Invisible Pink Unicorn in order to highlight Her invisibility. [citation needed]
Enlarge
This image features a pink unicorn, but it has an alpha channel that makes the image completely transparent, thus approximating the appearance of the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Blank images have been presented as depictions of the Invisible Pink Unicorn in order to highlight Her invisibility. [citation needed]

It is common when discussing the Invisible Pink Unicorn to point out that because she is invisible, no one can prove she does not exist. This is a parody of similar theistic claims about God, i.e. that because God is omnipresent, inability to detect him does not reduce his believability. The IPU serves as a parodic demonstration that utilizing a lack of evidence as proof of a deity's nature is ultimately absurd; that by this logic the IPU is just as credible as God. The IPU's two defining attributes, invisibility and color (it is pink), are inconsistent and contradictory; this is part of the satire. The paradox of something being invisible yet having visible characteristics (eg. color) is reflected in the mythology of some East Asian cultures, wherein an "invisible red string" is said to connect people who have a shared or linked destiny.[2]

The IPU and similar ideas have been used as teaching devices in the past. In his essay "The Dragon in my Garage" in his book The Demon-Haunted World: Science As A Candle In the Dark, Carl Sagan uses the example of an invisible dragon breathing heatless fire that someone claims lives in his garage.[10] The supposed dragon cannot be seen or heard or sensed in any way nor does it leave footprints. We have no reason to believe this purported dragon exists. This raises the question: How does the claimant know that this is a dragon rather than, for instance, a cat? For that matter, how can we know that the IPU is pink and has one horn instead of three horns or none at all? This observation is suggested in the title of a book by Judith Hayes—In God We Trust: But Which One?

There are humorous mock-serious debates amongst her followers concerning her other attributes, such as whether she is completely invisible, or invisible to most but visible to those who have faith in her. Some of these debates are quite elaborate and tortuous, satirizing the disputatiousness and intricacy of many religions' theological debates. Despite this, over time some agreement has developed regarding her attributes, with the most humorous and incongruous generally gaining the greatest consensus. For example, it is more or less agreed that she is partial to ham and pineapple pizza, although some vegetarians dissent, arguing that since IPU is vegetarian, it must be pineapple and mushrooms. Pineapple, anyway, is agreed upon, as is the fact that she despises pepperoni. Another point of agreement is that IPU "raptures" socks, which accounts for their otherwise inexplicable tendency to disappear. Socks raptured from your laundry are allegedly a "sign" of favor from IPU — or it could be disfavor, depending on who is asked, or perhaps upon which socks are raptured. Skeptics might suggest one seek a deeper understanding by looking under the washing machine's agitator for "raptured" garments.[citation needed]

Similar to the Devil of the Abrahamic religions, the Invisible Pink Unicorn is said to have an "opponent" in the Purple Oyster.[11]

"For I did see my unworthiness in Her sight, for I was a sinner, destined forever to spend existence in the presence of the unholy Purple Oyster; Waxing his shell and massaging his most wretched and slimy feet. For, lo, the Purple Oyster doth truly have feet, and the legs thereof, and the toes thereof, giving him dominion over all the clams of the seas, and allowing him to go unto the children of men, and tempt them unto destruction."
The Revelation of St. Bryce the Long-Winded (Partial), Chapter One, Verses 9 to 11[12]

The Purple Oyster, also known as the "Purple Oyster (of Doom)", or "PO(oD)", is said to have originally been one of the minions of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, but he was cast out of Her Pastures for the Great Evil of attempting to convince believers of the heretical notion that pepperoni and mushroom pizza is more pleasing to Her than the pineapple and ham.

In the Eley manifesto, IPUs were said to punish nonbelievers by pricking them with their horns; the pain of which was typically blamed on mosquitoes, which do not actually bite people but were said to be drawn to IPUs as horseflies are to horses.[citation needed]

[edit] Iconography

The Invisible Pink Unicorn logo, which is sometimes used to represent atheism.
Enlarge
The Invisible Pink Unicorn logo, which is sometimes used to represent atheism.

Adumbrations of Invisible Pink Unicorn commonly show either a fading pink unicorn, or simply nothing. Images representing "sightings" of IPU, showing an unremarkable image of a place where the invisible being supposedly was "seen", are also commonly presented as part of the joke. There is an Invisible Pink Unicorn logo that was created by frequenters of alt.atheism and adopted by others, and it is possible to purchase T-shirts, coffee cups, and other paraphernalia featuring the logo. One website selling these items describes them as a subtle means for atheists to recognize one another without giving offense to non-atheists; this suggests that the IPU has become a kind of emblem or mascot for atheists, particularly those who frequent online venues.

The name of the Invisible Pink Unicorn in jocular discourse is usually followed in brackets by a sentence such as Blessed Be Her Holy Hooves, Peace Be Unto Her, or May Her Hooves Never Be Shod, which in turn are often shortened to bbhhh, pbuh, or mhhnbs respectively.[citation needed] These epithets recall, and are perhaps intended to satirize, the Islamic practice of adjoining epithets to the names of Muslim prophets, most famously Muhammad. (See peace be upon him and Islam and veneration for Muhammad.)

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Angeles, Peter A. (1992). Harper Collins Dictionary of Philosophy. Harper Perennial, New York. ISBN 0-06-461026-8.
  2. ^ a b Maartens, Willie (2006-06-01). Mapping Reality: A Critical Perspective on Science and Religion. iUniverse. ISBN 0-595-40044-2.
  3. ^ Narciso, Dianna (2004-03-01). Like Rolling Uphill: Realizing the Honesty of Atheism. Media Creations. ISBN 1-932560-74-2.
  4. ^ Malkin, Michelle (September 30, 2000). alt.atheism FAQ. Internet Archive. Retrieved on 2005-02-11.
  5. ^ Jason Scott Yeldell (2004-11-03). A Call to Sanity. Trafford Publishing, 263. ISBN 1-4120-3096-X.
  6. ^ Jason Scott Yeldell (2005). A Call to Sanity Web Forum. A Call to Sanity.
  7. ^ Prowell, Stacy (1999-02-17). Red Iguana Dawn. Retrieved on 2006-05-19.
  8. ^ Natalie Overstreet (1994-07-19). "Veracity of Christianity". talk.origins. (Google Groups).
  9. ^ Clark, Michael D.. "Camp: "It's Beyond Belief"", The Enquirer, 2006-07-21. Retrieved on 2006-08-16.
  10. ^ Sagan, Carl. The Dragon In My Garage. ISBN 0-345-40946-9.
  11. ^ Catherine Leah Palmer. Fall & Redemption Of The Purple Oyster. Satire & Humour: The Invisible Pink Unicorn.
  12. ^ The Revelation of St. Bryce the Long-Winded (Partial).

[edit] Further reading

  • Deem, Rich (2005-06-18). Invisible Pink Unicorns, Santa Claus and God. Evidence for God from Science.— Deem rejects the comparison between the IPU, Santa Claus, and the Christian God, concluding that "A comparison between the existence of God (a non-contingent being) and the existence of Santa Claus or invisible pink unicorns (contingent beings) fails on many levels, not the least of which is that their fundamental natures (non-physical vs. physical) are vastly different.".

[edit] External links