Political Crossfire Forums

[Y2A]

Took one hit and bit one bullet.

http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/god.htm

Battleground God

Can your beliefs about religion make it across our intellectual battleground?

In this activity you’ll be asked a series of 17 questions about God and religion. In each case, apart from Question 1, you need to answer True or False. The aim of the activity is not to judge whether these answers are correct or not. Our battleground is that of rational consistency. This means to get across without taking any hits, you’ll need to answer in a way which is rationally consistent. What this means is you need to avoid choosing answers which contradict each other. If you answer in a way which is rationally consistent but which has strange or unpalatable implications, you’ll be forced to bite a bullet.

Rules of the game

The aim of the game is to get across the intellectual battleground unscathed. There are two types of injury you can suffer.

A direct hit occurs when you answer in a way which implies a logical contradiction. We have been very careful to make sure that only strict contradictions result in a direct hit. However, we do make two caveats.

First, because you only have choices between pre-selected and carefully worded statements, you might find that you have taken a direct hit because the statement closest to your own conviction leads into a contradiction. However, had you phrased the statement yourself, you may have been able to avoid the contradiction while expressing a very similar belief.

Such possibilities are unavoidable given the constraints on the game. We merely ask that you do not take it personally if you suffer a direct hit and don't get too frustrated if the choices we offer you sometimes seem to force you into a choice you'd rather not make.

You have to bite a bullet if your choices have an implication that most would find strange, incredible or unpalatable. There is more room for disagreement here, since what strikes many people as extraordinary or bizarre can strike others as normal. So, again, please do not get too upset if we judge you have bitten a bullet. Maybe it is our world-view which is warped!

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

The fact that you progressed through this activity being hit only once and biting very few bullets suggests that your beliefs about God are well thought out and almost entirely internally consistent.

The direct hit you suffered occurred because one set of your answers implied a logical contradiction. The bitten bullets occurred because you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hit and bitten bullets.

Because you only suffered one direct hit and bit very few bullets, you qualify for our second highest award. A good achievement!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How did you do compared to other people?

295668 people have completed this activity to date.
You suffered 1 direct hit and bit 1 bullet.
This compares with the average player of this activity to date who takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.11 bullets.
45.76% of the people who have completed this activity, like you, took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
7.62% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Hit 1

You answered "True" to questions 10 and 14.

These answers generated the following response:

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bitten Bullet 1

You answered "True" to Question 16.

This answer generated the following response:

You've just bitten a bullet! 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. This would seem to make rational discourse about God impossible. If rational discourse about God is impossible, there is nothing rational we can say about God and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or disbelief in God. To reject rational constraints on religious discourse in this fashion requires accepting that religious convictions, including your religious convictions, are beyond any debate or rational discussion. This is to bite a bullet.

[Snow Patrol]

A most interesting game.

Quote: Battleground Analysis
Congratulations!

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

The fact that you progressed through this activity being hit only once and biting very few bullets suggests that your beliefs about God are well thought out and almost entirely internally consistent.

The direct hit you suffered occurred because one set of your answers implied a logical contradiction. The bitten bullets occurred because you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hit and bitten bullets.

Because you only suffered one direct hit and bit very few bullets, you qualify for our second highest award. A good achievement

How did you do compared to other people?

* 295772 people have completed this activity to date.
* You suffered 1 direct hit and bit 1 bullet.
* This compares with the average player of this activity to date who takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.11 bullets.
* 45.76% of the people who have completed this activity, like you, took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
* 7.62% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.

Direct Hit 1

You answered "True" to Question 7 and "False" to Question 15.

These answers generated the following response:

You've just taken a direct hit! Earlier you said that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, regardless of the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But now you do not accept that the rapist Peter Sutcliffe was justified in doing just that. The example of the rapist has exposed that you do not in fact agree that any belief is justified just because one is convinced of its truth. So you need to revise your opinion here. The intellectual sniper has scored a bull's-eye!

Bitten Bullet 1

You answered "True" to Question 16.

This answer generated the following response:

You've just bitten a bullet! 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. This would seem to make rational discourse about God impossible. If rational discourse about God is impossible, there is nothing rational we can say about God and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or disbelief in God. To reject rational constraints on religious discourse in this fashion requires accepting that religious convictions, including your religious convictions, are beyond any debate or rational discussion. This is to bite a bullet.

[Gus]

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!


Hooray...

[EugenicHegemony]

Well, that was fun...

Quote: Battleground Analysis

Congratulations!

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

The fact that you progressed through this activity without being hit and biting only one bullet suggests that your beliefs about God are internally consistent and well thought out.


A direct hit would have occurred had you answered in a way that implied a logical contradiction. The bitten bullet occurred because you responded in a way that required that you held a view that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. However, because you bit only one bullet and avoided direct hits completely you still qualify for our second highest award. A good achievement!

Click here if you want to review the criteria by which hits and bullets are determined.

How did you do compared to other people?

295826 people have completed this activity to date.
You suffered zero direct hits and bit 1 bullet.
This compares with the average player of this activity to date who takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.11 bullets.
45.76% of the people who have completed this activity, like you, took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
7.62% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.

Analysis of your Bitten Bullet

Click here if you want to see a complete listing of the questions that you answered.

Bitten Bullet 1

You answered "True" to questions 7, and 15.

These answers generated the following response:

You've just bitten a bullet! You are consistent in applying the principle that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, regardless of the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity this conviction. The problem is that it seems you have to accept that people might be justified in their belief that God could demand something terrible.

This is something many religious people are willing to accept. For example, Kierkegaard believed that it is precisely because Abraham had to contravene established morality to follow God's will and attempt to sacrifice his son which made his act the supreme act of faith.

But as Kierkegaard also stressed, this makes the act incomprehensible from a rational point of view. The rational alternative - that people should require more than such an inner conviction to justify such a belief - is more attractive to most people, but you reject this alternative and bite the bullet.

[EugenicHegemony]

Gus wrote: 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!


Hooray...

You the man! You may as well kill yourself and meet your maker. You're ready. :-D

You are a chosen one:7.62% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.

Why did you change your name? I'm guessing people couldn't spell it. :lol:

[Cato]

3 bitten bullets; apparently my views aren't conventional. But why should that matter?

[EugenicHegemony]

Cato wrote: 3 bitten bullets; apparently my views aren't conventional. But why should that matter?

If it doesn't matter to you then it doesn't matter...

[Zoot]

No hits and bit one bullet, which I'm fine with, because the bullet was basically, "If people are crazy enough to believe in God, then they're crazy enough to believe that God wants them to rape." Which, after all, is Biblically sound.

[Zoot]

It is a bit odd that you receive the top honour if your views don't happen to contradict the mensch.

[EugenicHegemony]

Zoot wrote: It is a bit odd that you receive the top honour if your views don't happen to contradict the mensch.

It just goes by your personal truth. Your subjective "mensch".

If you contradict yourself.

This was mine:You've just bitten a bullet! You are consistent in applying the principle that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, regardless of the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity this conviction. The problem is that it seems you have to accept that people might be justified in their belief that God could demand something terrible.

This is something many religious people are willing to accept.

I'm agnostic...Morality has no bearing on real life.

[Æ]

I enjoyed the test. I had one point of confusion; I guess I wasn't watching the wording closely enough. :lol: Being that it is after 2AM here probably doesn't help matters.

[Deus]

Battleground Analysis
Congratulations!

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

The fact that you progressed through this activity without being hit and biting only one bullet suggests that your beliefs about God are internally consistent and well thought out.

A direct hit would have occurred had you answered in a way that implied a logical contradiction. The bitten bullet occurred because you responded in a way that required that you held a view that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. However, because you bit only one bullet and avoided direct hits completely you still qualify for our second highest award. A good achievement!

Click here if you want to review the criteria by which hits and bullets are determined.

How did you do compared to other people?

* 296375 people have completed this activity to date.
* You suffered zero direct hits and bit 1 bullet.
* This compares with the average player of this activity to date who takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.11 bullets.
* 45.76% of the people who have completed this activity, like you, took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
* 7.62% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour

[mardron7]

Bit one bullet answering honestly. Tried a few more times trying to be clever. Did much worse. What are the correct answers to get a perfect score? Sign me up for that religion. Ha ha ha.

[Gus]

mardron7 wrote: Bit one bullet answering honestly. Tried a few more times trying to be clever. Did much worse. What are the correct answers to get a perfect score? Sign me up for that religion. Ha ha ha.
The "correct" answers are based on whatever you initially answered...as long as you're consistent, regardless of if you're religious or atheist, you'll get perfect :) (supposedly).

[thefranzkafkafront]

Quote: 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!

A lot of the questions are worded very poorly however.

What can i say i pride myself on being as consistant as possible.

[Kindred]

wtf? Are the questions translated from Chinese or somethin?

Quote: Any being which it is right to call God must want there to be as little suffering in the word as is possible.

Huh?

[jawsome]

i can't stop pondering one of the questions posed in the survey: "could god make rape, murder, (insert immoral any action here) moral?"

this, along with a particular thread in this forum, have made me realize the modern conceptions of God are logically impossible and, well, wrong. i'll stay an agnostic, but that question has really gotten me thinking...

[Kindred]

jawsome wrote: i can't stop pondering one of the questions posed in the survey: "could god make rape, murder, (insert immoral any action here) moral?"

this, along with a particular thread in this forum, have made me realize the modern conceptions of God are logically impossible and, well, wrong. i'll stay an agnostic, but that question has really gotten me thinking... What thread?

[jawsome]

A.D wrote: jawsome wrote: i can't stop pondering one of the questions posed in the survey: "could god make rape, murder, (insert immoral any action here) moral?"

this, along with a particular thread in this forum, have made me realize the modern conceptions of God are logically impossible and, well, wrong. i'll stay an agnostic, but that question has really gotten me thinking... What thread?

right around here.

(thanks, Cato.)

[The Good Doctor]

Useless. Fascinating, powerful, and rigorous, but its intended audience isn't interested in ever being consistent or rational.