Personally I dont think the bullets I bit were particularly bad.
Have a go, it's a good laugh, though probably old.
___________________
Robots, machines, mechanical beings
Automatic and synthetic, we have the means
To take control of this planet and the human race
With our electronic rhythms and the Armageddon Bass
Sep-21-2004 22:56
Dervish
Your opinion matters.
Registered: Dec 2003
Location:
I tried it out it was pretty fun. But alot of the questions I kinda didn't know what they ment exactly as in they could mean a few differnt things. Dunno if that was the point or what tho.
___________________
If you can read this, I'm seriously fucking bored.
Sep-22-2004 01:20
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ
Registered: May 2002
Location:
Unfortunately this test doesn't work very well if your position isn't one of a handful of the pre-conceived positions it was designed for. It just ends up oversimplifying and straw-manning your position.
It was entertaining enough, but too simple to be genuinely satisfying.
Sep-22-2004 02:23
trancaholic
Danish Prophet of Doom
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: Aalborg
I don't get it completely. In the intro it assures you that the test has nothing to do with "right" answers, but only logical consistency of your answers, yet I got "bitten" by two bullets which generally criticised my answers because their logical closure entailed things which are not in line with morals and beliefs of the general population
Sep-22-2004 05:58
sensorium
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Jun 2004
Location:
I'm clean. It was expected since I failed philosophy twice. Just goes to show that the accuracy of the inaccuracy of what is supposed to be correct can be wrong.
___________________
Sep-22-2004 06:08
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ
Registered: May 2002
Location:
quote:
Originally posted by D.Edge
what does the general population's beliefs and morals have to do with logical consistency?
Nothing. That's one of the (several) problems with the game.
Sep-22-2004 21:53
Yoepus
Neo-condimist
Registered: Jan 2002
Location: Ketchup fields, Texas
real dumb. I bit 3 bullets, and I was trying to be logical too...
the questions were so stupid I didn't have an opinion them or what not so I just went with what hsould have been the logical answer according to my previous answers.
___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!
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:
Bite a bullet and claim that a higher standard of proof is required for belief in God than for belief in evolution.
Take a hit, conceding that there is a contradiction in your responses.
Hmm, this is kinda stupid. It's more a matter of definition differences between phrases "certain, irrevocable proof" and "overwhelming evidence" than a matter of logical inconsistency.
It was expected since I failed philosophy twice. Just goes to show that the accuracy of the inaccuracy of what is supposed to be correct can be wrong. 
