I have to start by warning you, these tests are not quick and painless. To really do them justice you need to think about your answers before choosing. That being said this shouldn't take more than 10-15 mins, I know everyone can spare that.
I was linked to one of the tests on the Ikariam forums and was shocked by how cool it was. Scroll to the bottom of the page and click on "If you're ready to start click here". Of course if you want to you can read the page first, it explains about the test. Don't read the Faq first due to spoilers. Of course I can't stop you but you'll know you're a cheating loser. http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/god.htm
Put my results in spoilers to avoid influencing peoples results.
( Click to show/hide )
I scored one direct hit and 3 bullets bitten. If you've taken the test you'll understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the test
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 suffering only one direct hit indicates that your beliefs about God are, on the whole, 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
I'm ok with my results.
Thanks in advance to anyone who trys it. I'm interested in seeing how everyone does.
This test was difficult for me. The questions were worded to be about an external, omnipotent being which I don't believe in.
I would also argue this:
( Click to show/hide )
Earlier you said that it is not justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction, but now you say it's justifiable to believe in God on just these grounds. That's a flagrant contradiction!
My two answers were not contradictions because the first questioned addressed beliefs on the external world while the second addressed my beliefs in God which in my case are two separate things.
That being said, I fared better than I thought seeing as the test was not aimed at me:
( Click to show/hide )
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 no bullets suggests that your beliefs about God are well thought out and almost entirely internally consistent.
Yeah I disagreed with one of mine too. The wording was tricky and meant to catch people imo. But still a fun test I thought. This is from the FAQ...
Quote:
11. Ridiculous - the questions are all open to various interpretations.
This is a bit of an odd objection. I mean, obviously, questions are open to interpretation - and, indeed, we try very hard in this activity not to force particular intepretations of God, omnipotence, etc., on people. [If there wasn't any room for interpretation, we'd get complaints about forcing people down fixed routes; actually, come to think of it, we do get complaints about this!]. It doesn't follow that as a consequence, the activity has no relevance in terms of finding out about the internal coherence of a set of beliefs. The point, of course, is that you know how you interpreted the question. Therefore, you're in a position to judge whether the hits and bullets are fair given the way that you interpreted it. Sometimes you'll conclude that they are - sometimes you'll conclude that they aren't.
They admit that it's not perfect. I think it's a good test, shows how some logic is flawed.
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 have progressed through this activity without suffering many hits suggests that whilst there are inconsistencies in your beliefs about God, on the whole they are well thought-out.
The direct hits you suffered occurred where your answers implied logical contradictions. You did bite a number of bullets. These 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 hits and bitten bullets.
The fact that you did not suffer many hits means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!
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!
Interesting quiz, and You hyped it to be harder than it was DudeBro
"...The people living there know thirst, hunger, disease, they suffer all these things and in the end, they grow old and die. But for one brief moment they shine as bright as the sun, because they know these hardships, they also know the meaning of happiness..."
hmmm well this was a little out there but it is what it is...
( Click to show/hide )
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!
I know, it's like the moral test and taboo's test on there, it's a bit limited, and the questions can be interpreted in multiple fashions. It's still pretty fun though
"...The people living there know thirst, hunger, disease, they suffer all these things and in the end, they grow old and die. But for one brief moment they shine as bright as the sun, because they know these hardships, they also know the meaning of happiness..."
Right-click to saveBattleground 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!
Click here if you want to review the criteria by which hits and bullets are determined.
How did you do compared to other people?
* 437449 people have completed this activity to date.
* You suffered 1 direct hit and bit 2 bullets.
* This compares with the average player of this activity to date who takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.10 bullets.
* 45.77% of the people who have completed this activity, like you, took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
* 7.76% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.
Introduce other people to this activity
If you enjoyed Battleground God, we'd be very grateful if you'd consider recommending it to other people by filling in the form below. Thank-you.
Recommend a Friend! Your E-mail .
Your Friend's E-mail .
Your Message .
The God of Philosophy
What can we know about God?
If you enjoy thinking about the kinds of issues that have been dealt with in this activity, then you'll probably enjoy Roy Jackson's book, The God of Philosophy.
Published by TPM, it covers all the major questions dealt with in the philosophy of religion. Do we need God to explain the origins of the universe? Can there be morality without a divine source of goodness? How can God exist when there is so much evil and suffering in the world?
For a table of contents, click here.
To read the first chapter, on the concept of God, click here.
For further information, click here.
Mailing List
Want us to let you know when we put together new games and activities at TPM Online? Join our mailing list by sending a blank email here, and we'll keep you up to date with developments at TPM.
Analysis of your Direct Hit
Click here if you want to see a complete listing of the questions that you answered.
Direct Hit 1
You answered "False" to Question 7 and "True" to Question 17.
These answers generated the following response:
You've just taken a direct hit! Earlier you said that it is not justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction, but now you say it's justifiable to believe in God on just these grounds. That's a flagrant contradiction!
****************
Analysis of your Bitten Bullets
Click here if you want to see a complete listing of the questions that you answered.
Bitten Bullet 1
You answered "False" to questions 6 and 7.
These answers generated the following response:
You're under fire! You don't think that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But in the previous question you rejected evolutionary theory when the vast majority of scientists think both that the evidence points to its truth and that there is no evidence which falsifies it. Of course, many creationists claim that the evidential case for evolution is by no means conclusive. But in doing so, they go against scientific orthodoxy. So you've got to make a choice: (a) Bite the bullet and say there is evidence that evolution is not true, despite what the scientists say. (b) Take a direct hit and say that this is an area where your beliefs are just in contradiction.
You chose to bite the bullet.
****************
Bitten Bullet 2
You answered "False" to Questions 10 and "True" to Question 14.
These answers generated the following response:
You've just bitten a bullet! You say that if there are no compelling arguments or evidence that show that God does not exist, then atheism is a matter of faith, not rationality. Therefore, it seems that you do not think that the mere absence of evidence for the existence of God is enough to justify believing that she does not exist. This view is also suggested by your earlier claim that it is not rational to believe that the Loch Ness monster does not exist even if, despite years of trying, no evidence has been presented to suggest that it does exist.
There is no logical inconsistency in your answers. But by denying that the absence of evidence, even where it has been sought, is enough to justify belief in the non-existence of things, you are required to countenance possibilities that most people would find bizarre. For example, do you really want to claim that it is not rationally justified to believe that intelligent aliens do not live on Mars?
****************
If you disagree completely, you might like to look at our FAQ
Click here to return to our Games Pages
Click here to visit our Religion Portal
Click here to return to TPM Online
one question I dont agree with the controdiction they said I have
[/quote]
( Click to show/hide )
[qoute]
You say that if there are no compelling arguments or evidence that show that God does not exist, then atheism is a matter of faith, not rationality. Therefore, it seems that you do not think that the mere absence of evidence for the existence of God is enough to justify believing that she does not exist. This view is also suggested by your earlier claim that it is not rational to believe that the Loch Ness monster does not exist even if, despite years of trying, no evidence has been presented to suggest that it does exist.
There is no logical inconsistency in your answers. But by denying that the absence of evidence, even where it has been sought, is enough to justify belief in the non-existence of things, you are required to countenance possibilities that most people would find bizarre. For example, do you really want to claim that it is not rationally justified to believe that intelligent aliens do not live on Mars?
[/quote]
this is acctually not true what I was refering to is athisim is a religion in its self so you must have faith to belive that there is not god.
though this is a controdiction to what the questions were asking it was the best answer to fit my belifs.
[br]Posted on: September 25, 2008, 09:42:19 PM_________________________________________________I agree with tensers first quote I missed that too I think they were 2 very different questions[br]Posted on: September 25, 2008, 09:43:08 PM_________________________________________________
( Click to show/hide )
Quote:
You answered "False" to Question 7 and "True" to Question 17.
You've just taken a direct hit! Earlier you said that it is not justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction, but now you say it's justifiable to believe in God on just these grounds. That's a flagrant contradiction!
In this one I was acctually refering to evolution I was saying you cant just take account for external evidence just because scientist say this is true because they may in fact be wrong and state that this is fact .... just because its where the evidence points they can not prove it one way or the other ... they are taking it on faith that the 'evidence' that they have proves what they belive is true they can not prove that is what acctually happened they have to belive that it happened and that is why evolution is a religion just like creation because you can not prove that it happend exactly this way and you have to take it on faith that it did happen.
The Loch Ness monster thing tripped me up also. If the monster actually existed, it would be something that can be seen or touched. If God existed, it's possible that our senses would not be able to discern him, and thus, he would impossible to prove or disprove.
I found the wording of some of the questions to be absolutely horrible. The whole "the being that it is right to call God" thing threw me off. The test is definitely designed to throw you off.
I started losing concentration on the last few questions, but overall a good time.
I found the wording of some of the questions to be absolutely horrible. The whole "the being that it is right to call God" thing threw me off. The test is definitely designed to throw you off.
I started losing concentration on the last few questions, but overall a good time.
Well the test was made in an attempt to catch people contradicting themselves. It has to be tricky or most people would be able to tell what the "right" answers are. I think this does a good job of being fair.
"The being that is right to call god" is odd sounding but it makes sense. It's saying if you don't believe in god, this is something that would have the right to be considered godlike. If that makes sense. Like if you don't believe in god and you encounter a being that can bring back the dead. You'd be likely to assume it's a god, even if you didn't believe in them before.
Glad to see people tried this, we all have very close scores.
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!
Honestly Kong from getting to know you
you are a straight forward person that really knows himself.
right before I clicked this topic I saw your the last post I thought to my self. Kong either 1) aced this test or 2) is just commenting on someone elses post.
Linear Mode
