| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jez" |
| Date: |
24 Aug 2004 05:19:27 PM |
| Object: |
Battleground God.... |
Can your beliefs about religion make it across our intellectual
battleground?
http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm
My results were.......
You have reached the end!
Congratulations! You have made it to the end of this activity.
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets. The average player of
this activity to date takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.12 bullet. 222230
people have so far undertaken this activity.
Click the link below for further analysis of your performance and to see
if you've won an award.
How did you do compared to other people?
* 222230 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 1.12 bullets.
* 45.99% of the people who have completed this activity, like you,
took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
* 7.41% of the people who have completed this activity emerged
unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.
So I guess I am an atheist after all !
:)
--
Jez
"The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious,
of being out of one's mind, is the condition of the normal man. Society
highly values its normal man.It educates children to lose themselves
and to become absurd,and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed
perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years."
R.D. Laing
.
|
|
| User: "Realityis" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
24 Aug 2004 07:29:25 PM |
|
|
Can your beliefs about religion make it across our intellectual
battleground?
http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm
My results were.......
You have reached the end!
Congratulations! You have made it to the end of this activity.
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets. The average player of
this activity to date takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.12 bullet. 222230
people have so far undertaken this activity.
Click the link below for further analysis of your performance and to see
if you've won an award.
How did you do compared to other people?
* 222230 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 1.12 bullets.
* 45.99% of the people who have completed this activity, like you,
took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction.
* 7.41% of the people who have completed this activity emerged
unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.
I took 0 hits and bit 0 bullets.
I was unscathed and was awarded the Medal of Honour.
Realityis
Traveler: "God has been mighty good to your fields, Mr. Farmer."
Farmer: "You should have seen how he treated them when I wasn't around."
~Author Unknown
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AnotherObserver®" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
25 Aug 2004 08:40:03 PM |
|
|
Jez <iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote:
Failed to conceive the following trickery:
Bitten Bullet 1
You answered "True" to questions 6 and 13.
These answers generated the following response:
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. So you've got a choice:
(a) Bite a bullet and claim that a higher standard of proof is required for
belief in God than for belief in evolution. (b) Take a hit, conceding that
there is a contradiction in your responses.
You chose to bite the bullet.
Not only for sake of score, I actually do think a higher standard of
proof should be required for a positive belief in any god or anything
metaphysical for that matter.
Anyone wish to entertain this notion?
--
Davidwd
~~~~~~~~~
irreligionist
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Graham Kennedy" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
24 Aug 2004 05:35:44 PM |
|
|
Jez wrote:
Can your beliefs about religion make it across our intellectual
battleground?
Badly written. They keep asking blanket questions like
"is X morally correct", but they don't ask by whose
point of view. I assumed they wanted my point of view
at first, but then they started asking questions about
whether other people are justified in thinking that
their actions are moral. But the question doesn't specify
if they want me to say whether it is moral from my viewpoint
or from theirs.
Plus, I hit a "false" when I meant to pick "true" twice
over; I hit back and picked the answer I wanted, and it
doesn't seem to hold that against you... but this means
that you could do that all the way through to get the
"right" answers.
Whatever, I ended up with no direct hits and one bullet bitten,
like you.
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
24 Aug 2004 06:22:53 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:19:27 +0100 in episode
<412bbf0f$0$20251$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> we saw our hero Jez
<iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com>:
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets.
Which one did you "bite?" I've had a long standing quibble with them over
whether "god" would need to be "constrained" by logic. They say:
"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."
Yeah. And? <g>
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Often anger is a sign of engagement with life. People who
are angry are touched deeply by the events of their lives
and feel strongly about them....Anger is just a demand for
change, a passionate wish for things to be different....
And, as it was for me, it may be the first expression of
the will to live." -- Rachel Naomi Remen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Realityis" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
24 Aug 2004 07:37:58 PM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:R5CdnX2MsMVWULbcRVn-qA@megapath.net...
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:19:27 +0100 in episode
<412bbf0f$0$20251$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> we saw our hero Jez
<iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com>:
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets.
Which one did you "bite?" I've had a long standing quibble with them over
whether "god" would need to be "constrained" by logic. They say:
"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."
Yeah. And? <g>
I answered false to that question on the grounds that the God concept has no
real meaning to me. I have no idea what a hypothetical God should or should
not be able to do.
Realityis
"After you've heard two eyewitness accounts of an auto accident, you begin
to worry about history." ~Author Unknown
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
24 Aug 2004 07:44:17 PM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:R5CdnX2MsMVWULbcRVn-qA@megapath.net...
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:19:27 +0100 in episode
<412bbf0f$0$20251$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> we saw our hero Jez
<iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com>:
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets.
Which one did you "bite?" I've had a long standing quibble with them over
whether "god" would need to be "constrained" by logic. They say:
"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."
Yeah. And? <g>
Same here. That is the only one I got 'wrong' and
my thought on their explanation was just the same
as yours.
--
RB
aa#2187
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "anne marie hovgaard" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
26 Aug 2004 09:00:34 AM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message news:<R5CdnX2MsMVWULbcRVn-qA@megapath.net>...
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:19:27 +0100 in episode
<412bbf0f$0$20251$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> we saw our hero Jez
<iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com>:
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets.
Which one did you "bite?" I've had a long standing quibble with them over
whether "god" would need to be "constrained" by logic. They say:
"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."
Yeah. And? <g>
I had the same problem. To me, the whole "God" concept (the one in the
Bible, and any other gods I have ever heard of anyone actually
believing in) _is_ a square circle. "Logically impossible" is part of
the definition.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Battleground God.... |
26 Aug 2004 11:12:06 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:00:34 -0700 in episode
<705782b9.0408260600.3683183a@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
amhovgaard@yahoo.no (anne marie hovgaard):
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:<R5CdnX2MsMVWULbcRVn-qA@megapath.net>...
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:19:27 +0100 in episode
<412bbf0f$0$20251$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> we saw our hero Jez
<iced_spear@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com>:
You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets.
Which one did you "bite?" I've had a long standing quibble with them
over whether "god" would need to be "constrained" by logic. They say:
"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."
Yeah. And? <g>
I had the same problem. To me, the whole "God" concept (the one in the
Bible, and any other gods I have ever heard of anyone actually believing
in) _is_ a square circle. "Logically impossible" is part of the
definition.
Yeah, I can see that. They're *already dealing in "square circles" rather...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Often anger is a sign of engagement with life. People who
are angry are touched deeply by the events of their lives
and feel strongly about them....Anger is just a demand for
change, a passionate wish for things to be different....
And, as it was for me, it may be the first expression of
the will to live." -- Rachel Naomi Remen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|