What kind of atheist are you?

Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
What kind of atheist are you?

Indisputable 100% accurate and scientific accurate quiz.

I'm a scientific atheist

 http://www.quizfarm.com/quizzes/quiz/ReverendAcid/what-kind-of-atheist-are-you/

 

 
 
Scientific Atheist
 
100%
Agnostic
 
83%
Apathetic Atheist
 
79%
Angry Atheist
 
38%
Militant Atheist
 
29%
Meditative Atheist
 
29%
Theist
 
4%

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
I took it

I just took it for the fun of it, and here is what I came up with : 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.

Scientific Atheist
 
92%
Angry Atheist
 
83%
Militant Atheist
 
75%
Meditative Atheist
 
67%
Apathetic Atheist
 
46%
Agnostic
 
38%
Theist
 
0%

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Thought I'd be angrier, to be honest...

 

 

Scientific Atheist
 
100%
Militant Atheist
 
67%
Agnostic
 
67%
Apathetic Atheist
 
50%
Meditative Atheist
 
33%
Angry Atheist
 
17%
Theist
 
0%

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
I actually wonder

I actually wonder how they came up with these questions and what decides the results. I mean, some of the ones that involved getting deliberately angry, or the ones about provoking people seemed to smack of trick questions. I wonder how one would fare with a set of different questions and answers ? Not that it really makes much difference to me, I just found that the content of some of the questions was rather interesting in their semantics.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
 This is me on two glasses

 This is me on two glasses of wine Smiling

 

Scientific Atheist
 
75%
Meditative Atheist
 
75%
Agnostic
 
67%
Militant Atheist
 
42%
Apathetic Atheist
 
25%
Angry Atheist
 
17%
Theist
 
0%

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:I

harleysportster wrote:

I actually wonder how they came up with these questions and what decides the results. I mean, some of the ones that involved getting deliberately angry, or the ones about provoking people seemed to smack of trick questions. I wonder how one would fare with a set of different questions and answers ? Not that it really makes much difference to me, I just found that the content of some of the questions was rather interesting in their semantics.

This reminds me of a bayes' theorem podcast I was listening to today.

Basically bayes's theorem (I think there was an attempted explanation by Natural at one time) is a statistical theory regarding probabilities.  It attempts to work out mathematically what the probability of... let's say a light in the sky being a UFO, is.

The reason this reminds me of that is because, in order to calculate probability, you have to consider your knowledge base on the subject.  Also, you need to be ready to question your assumptions if new evidence arises...

To answer you question, the answer arrived at is only as accurate as the the initial base of knowledge.  In this case, 40 questions carrying subjectively assigned value... Smiling 

I strongly recommend (only because I'm drunk Smiling ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDMgnzoLjo4

and Bayes' theorem research in general.  Warning, may actually cause you to question your beliefs.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level Moderator
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1710
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
They gave me a tie breaker

They gave me a tie breaker question between would I explode and then calmly explain "evolution is just a theory"  or that creations are not human. Choose the former.

 

Scientific Atheist
 
92%
Apathetic Atheist
 
92%
Meditative Atheist
 
67%
Agnostic
 
58%
Angry Atheist
 
42%
Militant Atheist
 
25%
Theist
 
4%

 

I thought AE would have been a bit more angry too. At least more angrier than me. Well, that just makes me angry Smiling

 

I apparently still have a touch of the theism. I said if god did exist I still would not worship him - he doed need to earn my respect after all this. But if he gave me evidence he existed I would believe in him. Guess that was the touch or rather I am touched or touche  of theism - bleh.

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:This reminds me

Ktulu wrote:

This reminds me of a bayes' theorem podcast I was listening to today.

Basically bayes's theorem (I think there was an attempted explanation by Natural at one time) is a statistical theory regarding probabilities.  It attempts to work out mathematically what the probability of... let's say a light in the sky being a UFO, is.

The reason this reminds me of that is because, in order to calculate probability, you have to consider your knowledge base on the subject.  Also, you need to be ready to question your assumptions if new evidence arises...

To answer you question, the answer arrived at is only as accurate as the the initial base of knowledge.  In this case, 40 questions carrying subjectively assigned value... Smiling 

I strongly recommend (only because I'm drunk Smiling ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDMgnzoLjo4

and Bayes' theorem research in general.  Warning, may actually cause you to question your beliefs.

This is interesting. I'll check it out when I get the opportunity.

Here's a question that we might can use the Bayes Theorem on ?

Should I get drunk, smoke marijuana, or be straight when viewing the video ? Smiling

I am going to say, since this is a new concept, it would probably be preferable to be stoned or just sober. However, being stoned has had it's benefits when being introduced to new concepts.

But, I'll probably have a few if it is later on at night.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I never liked these tests

I never liked these tests much. Might do them for the fuck of it, but I can't give it any credibility. There's always a bunch of questions that depend on my mood. And a bunch of others that can be misinterpreted. Case in point, I answered questions dealing with believing god as if it were a scientific question, thereby not absolutely rejecting the possibility of a god, and the stupid test says I'm 4% theist because I'm too scientific for it to make sense of my responses.

Scientific Atheist
75%
Agnostic
54%
Meditative Atheist
50%
Militant Atheist
42%
Apathetic Atheist
42%
Angry Atheist
38%
Theist
4%

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Yeah

ex-minister wrote:

They gave me a tie breaker question between would I explode and then calmly explain "evolution is just a theory"  or that creations are not human. Choose the former.

 

Scientific Atheist
 
92%
Apathetic Atheist
 
92%
Meditative Atheist
 
67%
Agnostic
 
58%
Angry Atheist
 
42%
Militant Atheist
 
25%
Theist
 
4%

 

I thought AE would have been a bit more angry too. At least more angrier than me. Well, that just makes me angry Smiling

 

I apparently still have a touch of the theism. I said if god did exist I still would not worship him - he doed need to earn my respect after all this. But if he gave me evidence he existed I would believe in him. Guess that was the touch or rather I am touched or touche  of theism - bleh.

 

 

Look - I answered rationally. Would I have been so rational in the heat of an argument? Probably not. I did answer 'totally agree' to the question "Has religion hurt you in a way you will never forgive" so there must have been some other questions that related to it. I generally agreed religion should not be banned, I didn't agree it was the worst thing the world had ever seen, I thought it had done some good, that not all theists were idiots. 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
yeah, I don't know where

yeah, I don't know where this 4% theist came from.

 

And I'm angrier than AE

 

 

 


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Wise

Vastet wrote:
I never liked these tests much. Might do them for the fuck of it, but I can't give it any credibility. There's always a bunch of questions that depend on my mood. And a bunch of others that can be misinterpreted. Case in point, I answered questions dealing with believing god as if it were a scientific question, thereby not absolutely rejecting the possibility of a god, and the stupid test says I'm 4% theist because I'm too scientific for it to make sense of my responses. Scientific Atheist 75% Agnostic 54% Meditative Atheist 50% Militant Atheist 42% Apathetic Atheist 42% Angry Atheist 38% Theist 4%

"not absolutely rejecting the possibility of a God". While there's no God separate or disconnected from material the term is normally related to people or a person and natural occuring phenomenon. People  normally think there are separate forces to consider, but in the study of the book we concluded that the "one God" application means that all force is God and force is used as a singular. What the book mostly and intends dealing with is forces in the connectivity between people or individuals as the social forces and consequences.  The "I" in the book is the same as force.   Smiling

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers

Knowledge trumps faith

Lies are nothing more then falsehoods searching for the truth