Website review: Battleground God
Draconis discovered this in Philosophy
•37 reviews since Oct 13, 2004
philosophy, religion, games
•philosophersnet.com/games/god.htm
People who like this website
- d26rodriguez
Los Angeles
- montzy1
Los Angeles
- immikla
Los Angeles
- rubie7
Los Angeles
- nohophil
Van Nuys
- billnorthup
Irvine
- mgtleary
San Diego
- robmarkg
San Diego
- MrCodeE
Hanford
- milir
California
StumbleUpon is the best way to discover great web sites, videos, photos, blogs and more - based on your interests.
Everything is submitted and rated by the community. Discover, share and review the best of the web!
Reviews of this website
Jint3i rated 7 weeks ago- "You've just taken a direct hit! Earlier you agreed that it is rational to believe that the Loch Ness monster does not exist if there is an absence of strong evidence or argument that it does. No strong evidence or argument was required to show that the monster does not exist - absence of evidence or argument was enough. But now you claim that the atheist needs to be able to provide strong arguments or evidence if their belief in the non-existence of God is to be rational rather than a matter of faith. The contradiction is that on the first ocassion (Loch Ness monster) you agreed that the absence of evidence or argument is enough to rationally justify belief in the non-existence of the Loch Ness monster, but on this occasion (God), you do not." But we all know where the Loch Ness monster is -supposed- to live so that we can go looking for it where it -should- be (location of sighting or there abouts). Where should God be at any given time?
- Samthenerd rated 2 months ago
- My atheistic views are rationally sound across the board. This is an interesting exercise, if you get them all "right" try going back and answering differently. Or answer as you think a friend would for logic ammunition in a debate.
- ajanelle rated 2 months ago
- i was just reading the instructions thinking: the entire concept of this game is seriously flawed, man; but then I found the disclaimer- "Of course, you may go along with thinkers such as Kierkegaard and believe that religious belief does not need to be rationally consistent."
Now I'll play the dumb thing anyway.
Woohoo, I am logically consistent and haven't been... shot... what this game is missing: Definition for the word "justified". A rapist is certainly justified in his own head (in his beliefs as the question asks)- whether he is morally justified is an entirely different issue. - i was just reading the instructions thinking: the entire concept of this game is seriously flawed, man; but then I found the disclaimer- "Of course, you may go along with thinkers such as Kierkegaard and believe that religious belief does not need to be rationally consistent."
- mysticalspork rated 2 months ago
- The only thing this test shows is that true/false options aren't sufficient if inspecific, assumption-laden words like "foolish", "justified", and "everything" are involved.
- kell81661 rated 2 months ago
- God test is your god metaphysically sound?
- AttemptingReason rated 2 months ago
- The test caused me to hone some of my views. It is more accurate to say that I believe that a god would be able to do everything that was possible, rather than anything at all.
- Pickle05 rated 16 months ago
- How did you do compared to other people? 357417 people have completed this activity to date. You suffered 1 direct hit and bit zero bullets. This compares with the average player of this activity to date who takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.11 bullets. 45.76% of the people who have completed this activity, like you, took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction. 7.70% of the people who have completed this activity emerged unscathed with the TPM Medal of Honour.
- chocolate-frenzy rated 17 months ago
- AIIII! The logic is so flawed here! What a horrible "test".
- berrypicker rated 17 months ago
- Can your beliefs about religion make it across our intellectual battleground?
