Godless-o-meter

[Jumi]

Strong agnostic... don't know why

 

[Penumbra]

I'm 100%: Ethical Culturalist, Freethinker, Iconoclast, Rationalist, Secular Humanist, Transhumanist.

My lowest was with Theravada Buddhism at 41%, followed by Taoist at 43%.

It doesn't seem very accurate if I'm 100% with six different labels even though I picked "neutral" over half the time.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm 100%: Ethical Culturalist, Freethinker, Iconoclast, Rationalist, Secular Humanist, Transhumanist.

My lowest was with Theravada Buddhism at 41%, followed by Taoist at 43%.

It doesn't seem very accurate if I'm 100% with six different labels even though I picked "neutral" over half the time.

I personally guarantee is it is completely accurate, for a given value of 'completely'.

(in truth, people tend to have more luck defining their own beliefs than relying on a dubious automated internet quiz, but it can become a talking point)

 

[Baladas]

100% Naturalistic Pantheist.
I suspect that the reason that Taoism trailed all the way in 10th (though still at 69%) may be because I am "strongly" agnostic towards most traditional deities, and Taoism is popularly thought of in relation to the Taoist pantheon (which is not necessary to be a Taoist).

I do not label myself strictly as a Taoist, but it is the tradition that I identify most with.

 

[LuisDantas]

Let's see if I have earned this self-given "Atheification Aura" that I have been using...


1. Secular Humanist(100%)

More Info
2. Transhumanist(96%)

More Info
3. Iconoclast(95%)

More Info
4. Rationalist(94%)

More Info
5. Objectivist(88%)

More Info
6. Implicit Atheist (86%)

More Info
7. Strong Atheist(84%)

More Info
8. Ethical Culturist (81%)

More Info
9. Ignosticist(78%)

More Info
10. Freethinker(76%)

More Info
11. Naturalistic Pantheist (76%)

More Info
12. Weak Agnostic(76%)

More Info
13. Strong Agnostic (69%)

More Info
14. Unitarian Universalist(64%)

More Info
15. Theravada Buddhist (60%)

More Info

I assume my Banthe would not be pleased...

 

[RedDragon94]

Meh, I'm bored. So I did a little quiz to tell me exactly what sort of non-theist a webpage thinks I am...
http://www.selectsmart.com/nontheism/

I'm, apparently, a Strong Agnostic, with the following definition provided;

Definition:

A strong agnostic is defined as one who denies that any person can possibly know whether any gods exist or not. This definition distinguishes strong agnostics from agnostics more generally, those who don't claim to know whether any gods exist or not. A strong agnostic is thus one who takes a position on the limits of human knowledge, not simply on their own knowledge of the existence or non-existence of gods.

The term strong agnostic was coined as an analog to the term strong atheist. Both terms share a similar relationship with their parent concepts. Strong agnostics goes a step further than agnostics and strong atheists goes a step farther than atheists. Whereas agnostics don't claim to know something, strong agnostics denies that that knowledge is possible; whereas atheists don't believe in gods, strong atheists deny that gods exist.

Examples:

In stressing our inability to pronounce on such lofty matters, Hume might be described as an agnostic or sceptic rather than an atheist. Nevertheless, the naturalist worldview that he espouses is practically identical to that of atheism.

God has no role to play in explaining the world and human experience, or the phenomena of art, morality, and religion. Hence a strong agnosticism tends to merge with a practical atheism whereby the concept of God becomes redundant in explaining or expressing features of the world and human existence.
- David Fergusson, Faith and Its Critics A Conversation

=================================================================

The quiz wasn't the worst I've seen, but I can't agree with it's conclusion.
I am assuming I get tagged as an agnostic since I think it's not possible to know whether God exists. But I find no reason to suppose he does. At all. Seems disingenuous, then, to call myself agnostic (or at least, agnostic without adding atheist to the term) simply because I don't figure it's possible to absolutely KNOW whether a non-interventionist God created us, and then forgot about us.

Anyone have any thoughts? Or any results, if you take the Godless-o-meter?

I always come out Rationalist as my #1 on this quiz.
#2 Secular Humanist
#3 Strong Atheist
#4 Objectivist
#5 Iconoclast
...
#19 Therevada Buddhism

 

[ThirtyThree]

100% Transhumanist, go figure.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

1. Ethical Culturist (100%) More Info
2. Weak Agnostic (94%) More Info
3. Freethinker (88%) More Info
4. Strong Agnostic (88%) More Info
5. Transhumanist (88%) More Info
6. Secular Humanist (83%) More Info
7. Ignosticist (82%) More Info
8. Confucianist (77%) More Info
9. Naturalistic Pantheist (76%) More Info
10. Rationalist (76%) More Info
11. Unitarian Universalist (76%) More Info
12. Objectivist (74%) More Info
13. Implicit Atheist (74%) More Info
14. Deist (70%) More Info
15. Strong Atheist (70%) More Info
16. Iconoclast (64%) More Info
17. Taoist (64%) More Info
18. Theravada Buddhist (59%) More Info
19. Atheistic Paganist (58%)

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I finally went and took the survey. My top 10 Results (remembering that I'm an animist):

1. Deist (100%)
2. Strong Agnostic (92%)
3. Naturalistic Pantheist (80%)
4. Unitarian Universalist (80%)
5. Weak Agnostic (80%)
6. Ethical Culturist (77%)
7. Implicit Atheist (75%)
8. Atheistic Paganist (69%)
9. Ignosticist (67%)
10. Taoist (67%)

 

[Willamena]

I like question 20. You can't be taking the quiz and agree with that with honesty.

 

[illykitty]

Here's my results, I answered neutral on a LOT of the questions, and agreed/disagreed only on a few:

Spoiler

1. Theravada Buddhist(100%)
2. Ethical Culturist (89%)
3. Strong Agnostic (89%)
4. Transhumanist(89%)

5. Weak Agnostic(89%)
6. Deist (87%)
7. Naturalistic Pantheist (87%)
8. Taoist (87%)
9. Unitarian Universalist(87%)
10. Secular Humanist(78%)
11. Rationalist(74%)
12. Implicit Atheist (73%)
13. Confucianist(58%)
14. Freethinker(58%)
15. Iconoclast(58%)
16. Strong Atheist(58%)
17. Atheistic Paganist (56%)
18. Ignosticist(43%)
19. Objectivist(38%)
​

I don't think it's particularly good, apart from showing my clear dislike of Ayn Rand's philosophy. ​

 

[jonathan180iq]

I had completely forgotten about this quiz, so I just took it again to compare my results...

A lot can happen to a person over the course of a few months:


Ethical Culturist(100%)

2. Naturalistic Pantheist(100%)

3. Unitarian Universalist(100%)

4. Deist (92%)

5. Freethinker(85%)

6. Strong Agnostic (85%)

7. Theravada Buddhist (85%)

8. Weak Agnostic(85%)

9. Secular Humanist(80%)

10. Taoist (80%)

11. Atheistic Paganist (78%)

12. Confucianist(78%)

13. Ignosticist(78%)

14. Implicit Atheist (78%)

15. Rationalist(71%)

16. Transhumanist(71%)

17. Strong Atheist(64%)

18. Objectivist(60%)

19. Iconoclast(57%)

 

[robocop (actually)]

Not enough questions for all of this information, in my opinion. But I was 100% objectivist.

 

[robocop (actually)]

100% Transhumanist, go figure.

May I recommend, if you are American, voting for Zoltan Istvan in the transhumanism party? He's got a great platform and he's an atheist... here's half and you can go see the other half:

1) Implement a Transhumanist Bill of Rights advocating for government support of longer lifespans via science
and technology. Lay groundwork for rights for other future advanced sapient beings like conscious robots and
cyborgs.

2) Spread a pro-science culture by emphasizing reason and secular values

3) Create stronger government awareness and policies to protect against existential risk (including artificial
intelligence, plagues, asteroids, climate change, and nuclear warfare and disaster)

4) Implement new futurist and pro-science policies but avoid enlarging government to do so

5) Implement policy for the phasing out of all individual taxes based on robots taking most jobs in the next 25
years. Advocate for a flat tax until we reach that point.

6) Advocate for morphological freedom (the right to do anything to your body so long as it doesn't harm
others). Defend genetic editing and other radical science that can transform healthcare.

7) Advocate for partial direct digital democracy using available new technologies.

8) End costly drug war and legalize recreational drugs (like marijuana)

9) Create government where all politician’s original professions are represented equally (the government
should not be run by 40% lawyers when lawyers represent less than 10% of the country’s jobs)

10) Significantly lessen massive incarcerated population in America by using innovative technologies to
monitor criminals outside of prison. Spend saved money on education.

 

[ThirtyThree]

May I recommend, if you are American, voting for Zoltan Istvan in the transhumanism party? He's got a great platform and he's an atheist... here's half and you can go see the other half:

1) Implement a Transhumanist Bill of Rights advocating for government support of longer lifespans via science
and technology. Lay groundwork for rights for other future advanced sapient beings like conscious robots and
cyborgs.

2) Spread a pro-science culture by emphasizing reason and secular values

3) Create stronger government awareness and policies to protect against existential risk (including artificial
intelligence, plagues, asteroids, climate change, and nuclear warfare and disaster)

4) Implement new futurist and pro-science policies but avoid enlarging government to do so

5) Implement policy for the phasing out of all individual taxes based on robots taking most jobs in the next 25
years. Advocate for a flat tax until we reach that point.

6) Advocate for morphological freedom (the right to do anything to your body so long as it doesn't harm
others). Defend genetic editing and other radical science that can transform healthcare.

7) Advocate for partial direct digital democracy using available new technologies.

8) End costly drug war and legalize recreational drugs (like marijuana)

9) Create government where all politician’s original professions are represented equally (the government
should not be run by 40% lawyers when lawyers represent less than 10% of the country’s jobs)

10) Significantly lessen massive incarcerated population in America by using innovative technologies to
monitor criminals outside of prison. Spend saved money on education.

I have a better idea:

1) Digitize the currency.

a) Implement mandatory chip based identification cards for all Citizens.
b) Implement optional human implantable microchips in place of identification cards.
c) Pair option B with biometrics for additional security.

The following problems will be solved or greatly reduced by just this motion:

1) Illegal immigration.
a) Anyone who does not have an I.D. card or an implant is not going to be able to take part in the economy, as they have no currency, since it is all digital. Digital currency makes it harder for corporations to hire illegals "under the table", as it leaves digital trails. In other words, it will be easier to investigate those who are paying illegals in this way.

2) Child abduction

a) The implanted form of identification would prevent a lot of child abduction, purely because check points could be configured to scan and alert when the child leaves a designated area. The added security of biometrics is also useful.

3) Illegal gun ownership

a) Smart guns would be the new default firearm sold. Smart guns would only fire when in the hands of those who were registered to them. In other words, the handle of the gun would have a scanner of a type, which would register with the chip in the card or implanted. Again, implanted technology has greater security. Children could not fire their parent's guns, using the implant method. As for the black market, the digital currency will make it harder. However, those who desire guns will always get guns. The goal is just to make that harder, hence the digital currency.

4) Tax evasion

a) Digital currency is traceable and tax evasion becomes more difficult. You can not just make "cash deals" because there is no "cash". Also, again, those who wish to break the law this will will try regardless. It will just make it harder.


5) Fatality due to medical professionals (especially overseas) not knowing medical information.

a) The implant method would make medical data readily available to medical professionals, which could be life saving in various situations.

 

[robocop (actually)]

OK so you keep 1uping him on the ID card, #15 in his plan:

15) Encourage private industry to develop and support usage of a cranial trauma alert chip that notifies
emergency crews of extreme trauma (this will significantly reduce domestic violence, crime, and tragedy in
America)

What about #'s 1-14 and 16-20?

 

[Curious George]

Meh, I'm bored. So I did a little quiz to tell me exactly what sort of non-theist a webpage thinks I am...
http://www.selectsmart.com/nontheism/

I'm, apparently, a Strong Agnostic, with the following definition provided;

Definition:

A strong agnostic is defined as one who denies that any person can possibly know whether any gods exist or not. This definition distinguishes strong agnostics from agnostics more generally, those who don't claim to know whether any gods exist or not. A strong agnostic is thus one who takes a position on the limits of human knowledge, not simply on their own knowledge of the existence or non-existence of gods.

The term strong agnostic was coined as an analog to the term strong atheist. Both terms share a similar relationship with their parent concepts. Strong agnostics goes a step further than agnostics and strong atheists goes a step farther than atheists. Whereas agnostics don't claim to know something, strong agnostics denies that that knowledge is possible; whereas atheists don't believe in gods, strong atheists deny that gods exist.

Examples:

In stressing our inability to pronounce on such lofty matters, Hume might be described as an agnostic or sceptic rather than an atheist. Nevertheless, the naturalist worldview that he espouses is practically identical to that of atheism.

God has no role to play in explaining the world and human experience, or the phenomena of art, morality, and religion. Hence a strong agnosticism tends to merge with a practical atheism whereby the concept of God becomes redundant in explaining or expressing features of the world and human existence.
- David Fergusson, Faith and Its Critics A Conversation

=================================================================

The quiz wasn't the worst I've seen, but I can't agree with it's conclusion.
I am assuming I get tagged as an agnostic since I think it's not possible to know whether God exists. But I find no reason to suppose he does. At all. Seems disingenuous, then, to call myself agnostic (or at least, agnostic without adding atheist to the term) simply because I don't figure it's possible to absolutely KNOW whether a non-interventionist God created us, and then forgot about us.

Anyone have any thoughts? Or any results, if you take the Godless-o-meter?

Lol, methinks you are trying to stir the pot. Is it better to distinguish agnostic from atheist or to have one as a sub category of the other?

 

[ThirtyThree]

OK so you keep 1uping him on the ID card, #15 in his plan:

15) Encourage private industry to develop and support usage of a cranial trauma alert chip that notifies
emergency crews of extreme trauma (this will significantly reduce domestic violence, crime, and tragedy in
America)

What about #'s 1-14 and 16-20?

1) I Disagree. At this time, the planet is overpopulated. Extending human lives will increase this problem. In short, the economy and how planetary resources are managed is not built for every Citizen to live two hundred plus years. However, maintaining life extension research as a matter for the private sector is something I agree with. In other words, it will be funded by those who can afford it.

2) I agree.

3) I agree regarding climate change, plagues, nuclear warfare and similar. I do not agree with excessive funding on protective policies regarding artificial intelligence. Skynet is hardly a realistic possibility, no matter how much paranoid scientists desire to believe it might be.

4) I agree. However, I disagree on being against larger government.

5) I am neutral on this issue.

6) I am neutral on this issue.

7) I do not support democracy.

8) I mostly agree, although the war on harder drugs should remain.

9) I mostly disagree. The government should be an oligarchy run by the brilliant, rational and scientific. I do not care if such positions are one percent or one hundred of the total population.

10) I agree.

11) I fully agree. Also, provide further "green" incentive programs for Citizens and corporations alike.

12) I am neutral on this.

13) I disagree on this. The entire space program should remain private, not waste government funds. Perhaps when humanity's future on Earth is better secured, government funded space exploration may resume. However, I do make one exception. The government should engage in defense based space exploration and research.

14) I am neutral on this subject. Perhaps simply add a transhumanist category to the current Olympic games, similar to the idea behind the Paralympics.

16) I agree.

17) I am neutral on this.

18) I agree regarding free education. However, the education should be fitting of the aptitude of the Citizen. I do not agree with the amount of funds wasted on those who do not require certain skills. As for mandatory college, I completely disagree. However, all higher forms of education should be free, providing the Citizen has the aptitude and requires the skills for their profession, which will benefit society.

19) I agree.

20) I believe government funds in this case should be relegated to both defense, education, social services and medicine. I also advocate all homeopathic (alternative medicine) as well as supplements, vitamins and so on, be fully regulated and controlled by the government.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Sounds like you mostly like him except a big no with #1.

Anyway I just want to throw out there that him saying he wants a cranial trauma alert chip is better than going out and saying he wants a chip to control everything; we must use politics to win elections and using the most likeable reason for an implanted chip is a wise start.

As for overpopulation, I have some hearsay right here if you would. Did you know that the world population isn't accelerating anymore? Did you also know that the U.S. produces enough food to feed the world, but throws out 35% of it before it reaches the grocery store? But if that's a major problem for you and it's his top agenda point, by all means don't vote for him and that's too bad because you were a trans-humanist also.

 

[ThirtyThree]

Sounds like you mostly like him except a big no with #1.

Anyway I just want to throw out there that him saying he wants a cranial trauma alert chip is better than going out and saying he wants a chip to control everything; we must use politics to win elections and using the most likeable reason for an implanted chip is a wise start.

Okay.

As for overpopulation, I have some hearsay right here if you would. Did you know that the world population isn't accelerating anymore? Did you also know that the U.S. produces enough food to feed the world, but throws out 35% of it before it reaches the grocery store? But if that's a major problem for you and it's his top agenda point, by all means don't vote for him and that's too bad because you were a trans-humanist also.

How can I vote in an election, if I am not a Citizen of the region the election regards?