Topic awaiting preservation: Battleground God

It made my head hurt (I didn't keep my results but I'll run through it again later when I am fully rested):
www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

interesting.

quote:

---

Congratulations!

You have been awarded the TPM medal of honour! This is our highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

The fact that you progressed through this activity neither being hit nor biting a bullet suggests that your beliefs about God are internally consistent and very well thought out.

A direct hit would have occurred had you answered in a way that implied a logical contradiction. You would have bitten bullets had you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. However, you avoided both these fates - and in doing so qualify for our highest award. A fine achievement!

---

Interesting game...

Hmm... I'm finding room to quibble here and there. For instance, one of the "setup" questions (where they later hit you by applying it to God) is "If, despite years of trying, no strong evidence or argument has been presented to show that there is a Loch Ness monster, it is rational to believe that such a monster does not exist." However, Loch Ness is a much more quantifiable and exhaustible field than "beyond all possible human perception," which is where God is assumed to exist.

I bit a bullet here: "In saying that God has the freedom and power to do that which is logically impossible (like creating square circles), you are saying that any discussion of God and ultimate reality cannot be constrained by basic principles of rationality." But my response is that although God is capable of doing the logically impossible, I can discuss God rationally -- or at least as rationally as such discussions get, which isn't very -- using the assumption that God chooses to act in a consistent manner.

Anyway, yes, very interesting test nonetheless.

Cell 1250 :: alanmacdougall.com :: Illustrator tips

quote:

---

You have been awarded the TPM medal of distinction! This is our second highest award ..
...You suffered zero direct hits and bit 1 bullet.

---

I guess this means DL is god.

I took a hit too, but I disagree with it I was first asked : "Evolutionary theory maybe false in some matters of detail, but it is essentially true.", to which I answered "true", because I believe that the evolutionnary theory is true. But then, when I was asked "It is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that God exists.", I answered true as well, and was told "It seems that you require certain, irrevocable proof for God's existence, but accept evolutionary theory without certain proof." This is a logical answer, except if one believe at 100% in the theory of evolution, which is my case.

Nonetheless it was an interesting test.

Oh, and there are other interesting games on this website. Worth taking a look at it.

Moon Shadow, I think it was correct, because you *don't* have irrevocable proof that evolutionary theory is true; you're willing to accept its truth based on whatever evidence you see for it, but you wouldn't be willing to believe in god without irrevocable proof.

Personally, I went through the test with the belief that it's OK to believe in something if you have large amounts of evidence for it, but that irrevocable proof is not necessary to believe in something. I think that in many cases we have to base our beliefs on what is most probable, even if it's not 100% proven.

I also hit the same bullet that Perfect Thunder hit:

"In saying that God has the freedom and power to do that which is logically impossible (like creating square circles), you are saying that any discussion of God and ultimate reality cannot be constrained by basic principles of rationality."

I suppose that's true, but I'm not sure what the conclusion is that it leads to. OK, so I can't base my beliefs in a God on logic. I'm not sure where to go with that.

quote:

---

You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

---

hmmmmm.....
i also bit the same bullet PT did.

__________________________
Cell 1007::

quote:

---

I guess this means DL is god.

---

Shhhh.....don't let it out. I don't want to have to start smiting people again.....

{{edit -

and of course, it is a rather silly thing in the long run - it leaves little room for the 'in-betweens' that are so essential for actual rational exploration of such a subject.

Rational doesn't have to mean "it's either 'a' or 'b'". There *is* middle ground }}

[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 11-01-2003).]

I tried this a while back... can't really remember how it turned out. But DL is right about the "in-betweens." I think it's interesting in that it makes you think about what you really believe, but the questions are worded in an attempt to make you trip on your own logic.

As for the bullet that a lot of people seem to be biting, I think there is a very simple explanation: God is not constrained by human logic or perception. Most of the people I know who believe in God feel this way, so I don't really see why they make such a big deal of it.


___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org

You have been awarded the TPM medal of distinction! This is our second highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

1 direct hit, no bullets.

You've just taken a direct hit! Earlier you agreed that it is rational to believe that the Loch Ness monster does not exist if there is an absence of strong evidence or argument that it does. No strong evidence or argument was required to show that the monster does not exist - absence of evidence or argument was enough. But now you claim that the atheist needs to be able to provide strong arguments or evidence if their belief in the non-existence of God is to be rational rather than a matter of faith.

The contradiction is that on the first ocassion (Loch Ness monster) you agreed that the absence of evidence or argument is enough to rationally justify belief in the non-existence of the Loch Ness monster, but on this occasion (God), you do not.

Which was rather silly of me to trip over. While not perfect, I think it's a nice test to do and to think about, which is more than what can be said about millions of other online tests.

Certainly a test to make you think a little about how you think about what standards you hold things to.

Test Results:
You took 1 direct hit and you bit 1 bullets.
Congratulations!
You have been awarded the TPM medal of distinction! This is our second highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

Took a direct hit on the Loch Nesw monster/God evidence questions,
and the bit the bullet on the creating square circles one.

__________________________
"Show me a sane person and I will cure him for you."-Carl Jung
Eagles may fly high, but beavers don't get sucked into get engines.
tj333- the semi-Christ

Battleground Analysis
Congratulations!
You have been awarded the TPM medal of honour! This is our highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

The fact that you progressed through this activity neither being hit nor biting a bullet suggests that your beliefs about God are internally consistent and very well thought out.

A direct hit would have occurred had you answered in a way that implied a logical contradiction. You would have bitten bullets had you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. However, you avoided both these fates - and in doing so qualify for our highest award. A fine achievement!

quote:

---

Congratulations!
You have been awarded the TPM medal of honour! This is our highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

---

Interesting test... Although I found it to be more a test of whether I could remember previous questions to not trip myself up further along the line than to test my rationality about the existance (or lack thereof) of God.

quote:

---

TPM medal of distinction

---

quote:

---

You stated earlier that evolutionary theory is essentially true. However, you have now claimed that it is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that she exists. The problem is that there is no certain proof that evolutionary theory is true - even though there is overwhelming evidence that it is true. So it seems that you require certain, irrevocable proof for God's existence, but accept evolutionary theory without certain proof.

---

Bit one bullet... And even after reading what it said about it, and what was said here, I wouldn't change either of those answers... ::just stubborn maybe::

Per Master Suho

As for the bullet that a lot of people seem to be biting, I think there is a very simple explanation: God is not constrained by human logic or perception. Most of the people I know who believe in God feel this way, so I don't really see why they make such a big deal of it.

I totally agree. Its a matter for the earthbound who are handicapped by the constraints of logic. That is, some have made to logic & reason their God and do not recognize where the ability to do so originates. Logic can also blind persons from seeing whats right in front of their noses. In some instances to be illogical can also be very refreshing and rewarding. Its when you try defy logic that makes life interesting. Too much creedence is put on the high superior human intellect who by unearthly standards are considered under developed in thinking. In that we humans only operate using a small percentage of our brains. I think God meant us to be able to use our brains in the fullest capacity. Until when God decides, we remain stupid for the time being. I am sure many innovators, great and famous men tried to defy logic and reason and triumphed. Show me a person who deals only with logic & reason and like Mr. Spock they are truly boring individuals with no spark in their eye. You cannot logic God into existance just like you cannot logic God non-existant.
But the greatest feeling in the world to feel is that there is a God
and that God is responsible for the vast universe and beyond what are minds cannot even fathom.

Lol.. I got to question 14 without a wound and then as I submitted answer 15 I got:

quote:

---

The page cannot be displayed :
The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties.
Please try the following:

Click the Refresh button, or try again later.

If you typed the page address in the Address bar, make sure that it is spelled correctly.

To check your connection settings, click the Tools menu, and then click Internet Options. On the Connections tab, click Settings. The settings should match those provided by your local area network (LAN) administrator or Internet service provider (ISP)..

---

I need to contact my ISP about my belief in God???

(Guess I was not meant to continue...)




[This message has been edited by Xpirex (edited 11-04-2003).]

quote:

---

I need to contact my ISP about my belief in God???

---

Big Brother, here we come...

"Click here to find out what you believe in today"


___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org

quote:

---

Congratulations!
You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

The fact that you progressed through this activity without suffering any direct hits indicates that your beliefs about God are very consistent.


However, you have bitten a number of bullets, which suggests that some of your beliefs will be considered strange, incredible or unpalatable by many people. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of the bitten bullets.


Despite the bullets that you bit, the fact that you did not suffer any hits means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!

---

That was fun, but the parameters annoyed me. It is very difficult to answer true or false when you really can't. But I'm impressed at how much critical thinking lessons they managed to cram into a little game like that.

. . : slicePuzzle

I bit a bullet on what MoonShadow tripped up on too, but I disagree with it as well like MoonShadow.. I can't recall the actual wording, but.. there is a great deal of proof that evolutionary theory is true in many many aspects, even if not in ALL aspects. Saying true to that shouldn't imply that I believe everything about evolutionary theory is correct when not neccesarily proven, and hence that I contradict myself by saying that I need proof for gods existence but not evo-theory.

There was one other reason I had a beef with that one, but I forgot. Besides that, I went through it fine. Kinda fun. You really need to concentrate on the wording of those questions.

-Xel

Wooo,

quote:

---

You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

The fact that you progressed through this activity without suffering any direct hits indicates that your beliefs about God are very consistent.

---

But i dont get the point of this 'excuse'

quote:

---

However, you have bitten a number of bullets, which suggests that some of your beliefs will be considered strange, incredible or unpalatable by many people.

---

So? Back in the days, Galileo's Heliocentric (sp?) theory had that same deal. People thought he was f*cked up, by many people. But he was right in the very end, isnt it?

I am not justifying myself, just stating that thats not a true reason to bite a bullet.

__________________________________


Alevice's Media Library