This should come as a surprise to no one…
May 26, 2007 9 Comments
You scored as Scientific Atheist, These guys rule. I’m not one of them myself, although I play one online. They know the rules of debate, the Laws of Thermodynamics, and can explain evolution in fifty words or less. More concerned with how things ARE than how they should be, these are the people who will bring us into the future.
What kind of atheist are you? |
Dubito Ergo Sum 
surprisingly enough, I scored the same. I expected apathetic or spiritual – I believe that God is one of those things that exists in the realm of the mind, so if you think he exists, then he does for you (i.e. God would not exist if sentient creatures did not exist to conceive of him)- it’s a very hippy-dippy Zen koan shaping your own reality kind of thing. it leads me to be welcoming of the religious until they get confused and think that their reality is (or should be) the same as external reality.Kind of like, ‘if a tree falls and no one hears it, does it make a sound?’ it doesn’t make a soundif there aren’t ears to hear it, but it does make sound waves. ‘Normal’ religious people think God is like the sound waves, where I think he’s like the sound.
Wow, I didn’t think you’d score that high on the “Militant Atheist” scale. I didn’t myself, and I always figured I was more militant than you. Perhaps I should go back and reevaluate my answers. Or perhaps there’s some steel underneath the soft, fluffy Tom exterior…
Further to Philosophizer’s point…Interesting distinction between sound waves & sound. A bit like communication theory. A message requires a transmitter & a receiver. Don’t know if that was McLuhan (The medium is the message). Perhaps if it’s a MEDIUM sized tree…?Also, “no one around to hear it” implies to many “no person”. What about squirrels, birds…. You addressed that with “no ears to hear it”.And this last is said from love…& humour…& love of humour:”Philospizer”. Sounds like a gizmo you’d maybe see on an infomercial). “Yes, just power up the Philosophizer 3000 and it solves all those age old questions that’ve been nagging you. Just ask it a question…and out pops the answer.” (42? Then you need the Philosophizer Plus, the back end sale, to explain the answer) “You’ll be amazed at how simple yet profound some of them are. And for just 3 easy payments of…But WAIT! There’s MORE! You also get the ginsu knives…!”
K…I’m risking being over-prolific here, so this is my last comment (for now; I’ll be back).Just took the quiz. Scored Scientific Atheist. Woo hoo! But, though I’d like to, don’t think I rate it (yet).”These guys rule. I’m not one of them myself, although I play one online.” Yup…well, sorta.”They know the rules of debate, the Laws of Thermodynamics, and can explain evolution in fifty words or less.” Know some of that, but couldn’t do it 50 words or less.”More concerned with how things ARE than how they should be,” Sorta. Definitely concerned w how things are…but have strong feelings about how things should be (that more people start accepting how things actually are than what’s traditional/comforting.”these are the people who will bring us into the future.” God (sic), I hope so. Gonna start doin my part. We need a snappy rallying cry like gays had “We’re Here. We’re Queer. Get used to it” or whatever.”We’re rational. And, uh, passional…” Okay, needs work.Gonna start a rational/skeptical/athiest podcast “Real Soon Now”
Bruce, you made my day. I was going for a mix of infomercialling and of course, the Two Great Ones – Bill and Ted!And yeah, I wanted to make sue squirrels and birds and such were included, because all that matters is that a sound receptor picks up the waves to convert them into sound. Yes, I’m the sort of weird person who reduces Zen koans to science – the idea of a question that’s designed to not have an answer does not compute :)
akusai – I was surprised, too, that Tom was so “militant”I’m also surprised that I am “agnostic.” But if all it takes to be agnostic is to be willing to “consider the possibility that they may be wrong about God’s existence” then count me in!Then again, what’s the matter with the rest of the world? “What kind of atheist are you?You scored as a AgnosticAgnostics consider the possibility that they may be wrong about God’s existence, no matter which side of the fence they stand on. Always willing to objectively evaluate the most ridiculous proof, nevertheless, these guys are skeptics of the Nth degree. Agnostic 67% Scientific Atheist 67% Theist 50% Apathetic Atheist 42% Spiritual Atheist 42% Militant Atheist 8% Angry Atheist 8%”
I’m a little surprised by the “Militant” thing myself, and a little offended, given how little meaning that term actually has. How do “militant” and “angry” differ? I imagine I scored that high based on agreeing that Kent Hovind is a moron, starting arguments with family members (it’s not my fault that History Channel decided to give credence to the Shroud of Turin), agreeing to debate theists anywhere, and threatening to scream if I hear “evolution is just a theory” one more time. Actually, most of my friends know that I’ll downshift automatically into lecture mode if I hear the phrase “just a theory;” these days, it’s barely even conscious.And there were a few questions I went with the in-between answer on, because I agreed with half of it. I do enjoy debating Christians, but I don’t usually end up calling them names. I can’t possibly know for sure that there is no god, but that doesn’t mean I won’t say “there is no god” until other evidence presents itself (although that question suffers from poor wording; I won’t say that I know for sure there is no god, because I don’t. But I will say “there is no god” based on current evidence, as much as I’ll say “there is no unicorn”). In fact, like most online personality tests, I think this one suffers from some poorly-phrased questions, and I imagine I’d score a little differently if I took it again. I know if I’d taken it three years ago, I would have totally agreed with “I don’t know and you don’t either, so shut up about it,” but these days I’m far more inclined to say “I don’t know and you don’t either, wanna talk about it?”What I wasn’t surprised about was getting the scientific atheist thing. I’m a little surprised that Agnostic wasn’t higher on the list (still that, too), but I think most of the clearly-agnostic questions were leaning more toward Huxleyan agnosticism (“It can’t be known”) and I tend to disagree with that. After seeing that Agnostic label, I’m a little doubtful as to the construction of the quiz in its entirety, because I think that describes me pretty well as well. I think most atheists would be open to new information, regardless of how “militant” they are. If Yahweh showed up at PZ Myers’ doorstep and performed a dozen miracles over brunch, somehow I think Myers would believe in him.Now, worshiping is another matter entirely…
I’m doubtful as to the construction of all these kinds of quizzes.I rated as agnostic (no surprises there) but I dead-heated on 92% between that and scientific agnostic, which I notice means that I theoretically know my thermodynamics (I do not) and observe the rules of debate (ditto).Happy, but I think it would have been interesting if they threw a few more into the mix. Apatheists, ignostics, weak theists and animists come to mind.
Meant to say “scientific atheist”.By the way, I also would never have pegged you as rating so highly on the militant atheist scale.