Anime, Hentai, Manga, Bishoujo Games, Live Action Films, Music, Art, and Erotic Doujinshi Discussion Forum

It is currently December 13th, 2017, 2:25 am


All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 18th, 2007, 2:56 pm 
Offline
Major Contributor
User avatar

Joined: April 26th, 2007, 7:33 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: Austin, Texas
You scored 55% Non-Reductionism, 77% Epistemological Absolutism, and 88% Moral Objectivism!

You are an N-A-O: a metaphysical Non-Reductionist, an epistemological Absolutist, and a moral Objectivist. If you are simply dying inside to figure out what all this mumbo-jumbo means, then simply continue reading.

"As a Non-Reductionist, you recognize that reality is not necessarily simple or unified, and you thus tend to produce a robust ontology instead of carelessly shaving away hypothetical entities that reflect our philosophical experiences."

"As an Absolutist, you believe that objective knowledge is possible given the right approach, and you deny the claims of skeptical philosophers who insist that we can never have knowledge of ultimate reality."

"As a moral Objectivist, you are opposed to Subjectivist moral theories and believe that morality applies to people universally and actually describes objects and situations out in the world as opposed to just subjects themselves."

This definition of moral objectivism seems to lean more toward moral absolutism than objectivism. Oh well, it's just a survey . . .

I think the survey could have been done a little better. It seems that in each set of four questions, there was not enough diversity amongst them. I could have thought of at least one or two other choices for each question, especially the last question.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 18th, 2007, 8:38 pm 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
Your Score: N-S-R

You scored 66% Non-Reductionism, 33% Epistemological Absolutism, and 11% Moral Objectivism!

You are an N-S-R: a metaphysical Non-Reductionist, an epistemological Skeptic, and a moral Relativist. If you are simply dying inside to figure out what all this mumbo-jumbo means, then simply continue reading.

[i]Metaphysics: Non-Reductionism (Idealism or Realism) In metaphysics, my test measures your tendency towards Reductionism or Non-Reductionism. As a Non-Reductionist, you recognize that reality is not necessarily simple or unified, and you thus tend to produce a robust ontology instead of carelessly shaving away hypothetical entities that reflect our philosophical experiences. My test recognizes two types of Non-Reductionists: Idealists and Realists.

1. Idealists believe that reality is fundamentally unknowable. All we can ever know is the world of sense experience, thought, and other phenomena which are only distorted reflections of an ultimate (or noumenal) reality. Kant, one of the most significant philosophers in history, theorized that human beings perceive reality in such a way that they impose their own mental frameworks and categories upon reality, fully distorting it. Reality for Kant is unconceptualized and not subject to any of the categories our minds apply to it. Idealists are non-reductionists because they recognize that the distinction between phenomenal reality and ultimate reality cannot be so easily discarded or unified into a single reality. They are separate and distinct, and there is no reason to suppose the one mirrors the other. Major philosophical idealists include Kant and Fichte.

2. Realists deny the validity of sloppy metaphysical reductions, because they feel that there is no reason to suspect that reality reflects principles of parsimony or simplicity. Realism is the most common-sensical of the metaphysical views. It doesn't see reality as a unity or as reducible to matter or mind, nor does it see reality as divided into a phenomenal world of experience and an unknowable noumenal world of things-in-themselves. Realist metaphysics emphasizes that reality is for the most part composed of the things we observe and think. On the question of the existence of universals, for instance, a realist will assert that while universals do not physically exist, the relations they describe in particulars are as real as the particular things themselves, giving universals a type of reality. Thus, no reduction is made. On the mind-body problem, realists tend to believe that minds and bodies both exist, and the philosophical problems involved in reducing mind to matter or matter to mind are too great to warrant such a reduction. Finally, realists deny that reality is ultimately a Unity or Absolute, though they recognize that reality can be viewed as a Unity when we consider the real relations between the parts as constituting this unity--but it doesn't mean that the world isn't also made up of particular things. Aristotle and Popper are famous realists.

*****

Epistemology: Skepticism (Idealism or Subjectivism) In regards to epistemology, my test measures your tendency towards Absolutism or Skepticism. As an epistemological Skeptic, you believe that ultimate reality cannot be known in any objective way. The two categories of Skeptics that my test recognizes are Idealists and Subjectivists.

1. Epistemological Idealists believe that knowledge of ultimate reality is impossible. All we can ever have knowledge about is the world of phenomenal human experience, but there is no reason to suspect that reality mirrors our perceptions and thoughts, according to Idealists. Idealists, then, tend to see truth not as a correspondence between propositions and reality--reality is, after all, fundamentally unknowable--but as a coherence between a whole system of propositions taken to be true. We cannot escape from language or our conceptualized world of phenomena, so we are unable to reference propositions to facts and must instead determine their truth by comparing them to other propositions we hold to be true. As a result of such an idealism, knowledge of any ultimate reality is taken to be impossible, hence the Skeptical tendency of idealism. All our pursuits of knowledge, science included, can only reflect a phenomenal reality that is of our own making. Famous idealists include Kant and Fichte.

2. Epistemological Subjectivists, like idealists, believe that all our knowledge is ultimately of our own making because it is filtered through our subjective perceptions. Unlike an idealist, though, a subjectivist doesn't believe in any universal categories of "truth" that apply to the phenomenal world, because each individual can create his own truth. Either that, or he will hold that society or custom creates its own forms of truth. A subjectivist will tend to regard scientific inquiry as a game of sorts--science does not reveal truths about reality, but only gives scientists pseudo-solutions to pseudo-problems of the scientific community's own devising. It is a type of puzzle-solving, but the puzzle isn't of reality. The definition of truth to a subjectivist may be one that recognizes a proposition's usefulness to an individual. William James is one such subjectivist, who believes that we can "will to believe" certain propositions so long as we would find them useful. The example he gives is being found in a situation where you must leap over a chasm in order to survive. The true belief, in such a situation, is that the leap will be successful--this truth is certainly more useful to us, and in believing the truth we become more willing to commit to the jump and make it successful. So, in essence, knowledge of reality is possible for a subjectivist because they never make reference to any objective reality existing outside of our own perceptions and beliefs--we can have knowledge of reality through having knowledge of ourselves, and that is all that we should ask for. Famous subjectivists include Kuhn, Feyarabend, and James. Another famed critic of Absolutism is Hume.

*****

Ethics: Relativism (Subjectivism or Emotivism) My test measures one's tendency towards moral Objectivism or moral Relativism in regards to ethics. As a moral Relativist, you tend to see moral choices as describing a subject's reaction to a moral object or situation, and not as a property of the moral object itself. You may also feel that moral words are meaningless because they do not address any empirical fact about the world. My test recognizes two types of moral relativists--Subjectivists and Emotivists.

1. Subjectivists see individual or collective desires as defining a situation's or object's moral worth. Thus, the subject, not the object itself, determines the value. Subjectivists recognize that social rules, customs, and morality have been wide-ranging and quite varied throughout history among various cultures. As a result, Subjectivism doesn't attempt to issue hard and fast rules for judging the moral worth of things. Instead, it recognizes that what we consider "good" and "right" is not bound by any discernable rule. There is no one trait that makes an act good or right, because so many different kinds of things have been called good and right. In regards to the definition of "good" or "right", a Subjectivist will tend to define it as whatever a particular person or group of people desire. They do not define it merely as "happiness" or "pleasure", for instance, because sometimes we desire to do things that do not produce pleasure, and because we don't consider all pleasurable things good. Furthermore, Subjectivists recognize the validity of consequentialism in that sometimes we refer to consequences as good and bad--but they also recognize that our intentions behind an action, or the means to the end, can also determine an act's moral worth. Again, there is no one rule to determine these things. Hence the relativism of moral Subjectivism. The most well-known of the subjectivists is Nietzsche.

2. Emotivists are moral Relativists only in a very slanted sense, because they actually deny that words about morality have any meaning at all. An Emotivist would probably accept Hume's argument that it is impossible to derive an "ought" from an "is"--no factual state of affairs can logically entail any sort of moral action. Furthermore, a emotivist's emphasis on scientific (and hence empirical) verification and testing quickly leads to the conclusion that concepts such as "good" and "right" don't really describe any real qualities or relations. Science is never concerned with whether a particular state of affairs is moral or right or good--and an emotivist feels much the same way. Morality is thus neither objective or subjective for the emotivist--it is without any meaning at all, a sort of vague ontological fiction that is merely a symbol for our emotional responses to certain events. Famous emotivists include Ayer and other positivists associated with the Vienna Circle.

*****

As you can see, when your philosophical position is narrowed down there are so many potential categories that an OKCupid test cannot account for them all. But, taken as very broad categories or philosophical styles, you are best characterized as an N-S-R. Your exact philosophical opposite would be an R-A-O.

----------------------------------------------------

A very interesting test, but yeah, uses a lot of high-brow words. Even I had trouble working out what some questions were trying to ask.

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 19th, 2007, 1:13 am 
Offline
Junior Member
User avatar

Joined: May 21st, 2007, 2:46 pm
Posts: 109
You scored 66% Non-Reductionism, 44% Epistemological Absolutism, and 77% Moral Objectivism!

You are an N-S-O: a metaphysical Non-Reductionist, an epistemological Skeptic, and a moral Objectivist.

As a Non-Reductionist, you recognize that reality is not necessarily simple or unified, and you thus tend to produce a robust ontology instead of carelessly shaving away hypothetical entities that reflect our philosophical experiences.

As an epistemological Skeptic, you believe that ultimate reality cannot be known in any objective way.

As a moral Objectivist, you are opposed to Subjectivist moral theories and believe that morality applies to people universally and actually describes objects and situations out in the world as opposed to just subjects themselves.

...sounds good. 8)

_________________
Anime Master David Siudzinski


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 19th, 2007, 7:12 am 
Offline
Resident Scholar
User avatar

Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:57 am
Posts: 4121
Location: Trier, Germany
spazmaster666 wrote:
"As an Absolutist, you believe that objective knowledge is possible given the right approach, and you deny the claims of skeptical philosophers who insist that we can never have knowledge of ultimate reality."

I knew your score would be like that... :D

Zaxares, you posted the whole thing... aaarghl... :)

_________________
42317
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 19th, 2007, 8:24 pm 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
42317 wrote:
Zaxares, you posted the whole thing... aaarghl... :)


Well, just in case people wanted to know what the heck my results meant. :wink:

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 20th, 2007, 1:41 am 
Offline
Major Contributor
User avatar

Joined: April 26th, 2007, 7:33 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: Austin, Texas
42317 wrote:
spazmaster666 wrote:
"As an Absolutist, you believe that objective knowledge is possible given the right approach, and you deny the claims of skeptical philosophers who insist that we can never have knowledge of ultimate reality."

I knew your score would be like that... :D


Well it was easy enough for me to answer the questions in a way so that I can get whatever result I wanted . . . ;)

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 20th, 2007, 4:26 am 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
spazmaster666 wrote:
Well it was easy enough for me to answer the questions in a way so that I can get whatever result I wanted . . . ;)


Yeah, it's pretty obvious from the options to guess what the results would be. :wink: Still, you DID answer the questions how you would have normally answered them?

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 20th, 2007, 4:01 pm 
Offline
Major Contributor
User avatar

Joined: April 26th, 2007, 7:33 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: Austin, Texas
Zaxares wrote:
Yeah, it's pretty obvious from the options to guess what the results would be. :wink: Still, you DID answer the questions how you would have normally answered them?


For the most part yes. However, there were a few questions in which I didn't really agree with any of the options, and hence had to compromise a little.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 20th, 2007, 11:35 pm 
Offline
Junior Member
User avatar

Joined: May 21st, 2007, 2:46 pm
Posts: 109
spazmaster666 wrote:
For the most part yes. However, there were a few questions in which I didn't really agree with any of the options, and hence had to compromise a little.


Like that last one for example. :roll:

One thing I don't get is how there are certain questions you can answer in a certain way and you think you're being all morally righteous in your answer and then the results come up and say you were a 77% cold-hearted asshole who eats children. :shock:

Maybe I'm taking too many of these quizzes. :wink:

_________________
Anime Master David Siudzinski


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 21st, 2007, 5:14 am 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
Heh, at least there was a perfect option for me for that last question. ;)

Well... second-perfect, I guess. I would have shot the guy first, but the question didn't allow me to.

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 21st, 2007, 12:37 pm 
Offline
Major Contributor
User avatar

Joined: April 26th, 2007, 7:33 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: Austin, Texas
AMDS wrote:
Like that last one for example. :roll:


That's because the author limits moral objectivism to Kantianism and Utilitarianism. Both of which are pretty outdated philosophies. (Utilitarianism for instance is generally rejected by most modern ethical philosophers because it is essentially tyranny of the majority, and Kantianism completely ignores the ultimate consequence of actions and hence can also be a very dangerous philosophy)

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 21st, 2007, 1:12 pm 
Offline
Resident Scholar
User avatar

Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:57 am
Posts: 4121
Location: Trier, Germany
spazmaster666 wrote:
Kantianism completely ignores the ultimate consequence of actions and hence can also be a very dangerous philosophy)

Hm... I'll take my comment to the Philosophy Thread.

_________________
42317
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QUIZ Thread
PostPosted: August 2nd, 2008, 1:23 pm 
Offline
Resident Scholar
User avatar

Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:57 am
Posts: 4121
Location: Trier, Germany
Here's the latest tests I took:

1. The Commonly Confused Words Test at HelloQuizzy

My result:

English Genius

You scored 100% Beginner, 100% Intermediate, 100% Advanced, and 80% Expert!

But it's a pretty easy test, with just two or three rather crunchy choices.


2. What Mage Are You?

My result...

Alchemist

Image

"You can reduce anything to the same element."

A fun quiz with a well written analysis at the end.
It could just be that the last paragraph is a bit out of this world.


Edit: Here's the analysis text that the wuiz' result offered me.

You scored 40% on Energy, higher than 45% of your peers.
You scored 60% on Learning, higher than 71% of your peers.
You scored 80% on Reason, higher than 88% of your peers.


Alchemists are interested in maintaining harmony in every aspect of their lives. They are a peaceful and easygoing people who adopt a "live and let live" approach to life. They enjoy taking things at their own pace and tend to live in the moment. Although quiet, they are pleasant, considerate, and caring, devoted to the people in their lives. Though not inclined to debate or necessarily even air their views, their values are important to them. They are very observant. Friends and family are likely to describe them as thoughtful and trustworthy.

They are extremely sensitive to their environment, attuned to the perceptions of their five senses even more than other sensing types are. They notice little variations in their physical world or in the people around them. They are very sensitive to balance and understand well what does or does not fit, whether in a work of art or any other aspect of their lives. Alchemists are highly conscious of their companions, but they prefer to allow others to direct their own lives. They tend to be emotionally well rounded and empathetic toward others.

Alchemists are most concerned with taking care of people by keeping them safe and secure. They are modest caretakers who do not demand credit or thanks for their efforts. But while they are essentially very compassionate—and in fact exercise more patience - their shyness with strangers can lead others to misread them as standoffish. Only among friends and family may this quiet type feel comfortable speaking freely. They enjoy taking care of others - they do not enjoy giving orders.

And now here's the last paragraph that reads more like an RPG illustrational text:

Active in fields from ancient biotechnology to combining and creating mixtures, the Alchemist strives only to perfect their biotechnology, and in the end, to successfully summon a homunculus. The potions they brew can bring someone from the edge of death and eat away at the armor of the body and soul. Their biotechnology also allows for the temporary summoning of monsters to help in battle. Daily they gather material and research, in order to create biotechnology's greatest advantages: the homunculus.

But the quiz was somehow related to "Ragnarök Online" anyway, so I should not be too surprised about the contents.

_________________
42317
Image


Last edited by 42317 on August 3rd, 2008, 11:06 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QUIZ Thread
PostPosted: August 2nd, 2008, 5:26 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: April 3rd, 2007, 8:57 pm
Posts: 859
Your result for The Commonly Confused Words Test...
Advanced
You scored 100% Beginner, 100% Intermediate, 80% Advanced, and 73% Expert!
The Commonly Confused Words Test

A lot more than I expected! :D

Your result for What Mage Are You?...
Bard
"Your fates whisper softly; we sing it boldly."
Image
What Mage Are You? at HelloQuizzy

# You scored 80% on Energy, higher than 82% of your peers.
# 38/100 You scored 40% on Learning, higher than 38% of your peers.
# 72/100 You scored 60% on Reason, higher than 72% of your peers.

EDIT: This is the description for the Bard.

Bards delight in novelty. They are optimistic, enthusiastic, and vivacious, craving expressions of strong emotion. With a dramatic flair, they share their experiences with others, hoping to reveal some universal truth or win others over in support of a cause. Attuned to possibilities, Bards scan their environment, probing the emotions, needs, and motivations of others. This sensitivity sometimes conflicts with their intense drive for personal authenticity. Spontaneous and personable, they attract others to their company.

They are initiators of change, keenly perceptive of possibilities. They energize and stimulate others through their contagious enthusiasm. They prefer the start-up phase of a project or relationship, and are tireless in the pursuit of new-found interests. Bards are able to anticipate the needs of others and to offer them needed help and appreciation. They bring zest, joy, liveliness, and fun to all aspects of their lives. They are at their best in situations that are fluid and changing, and that allow them to express their creativity and use their charisma. They tend to idealize people, and can be disappointed when reality fails to fulfill their expectations. They are easily frustrated if a project requires a great deal of follow-up or attention to detail.

Bards seek continuity through harmonious relationships and collective values. They excel at picking up on the tone of a situation and acting accordingly, adding warmth to a cool setting or turning sour into sweet. They naturally seek to know what people do well, what they enjoy, and where and how they work. They seem to have an infinite number of acquaintances from all walks of life and are always on the lookout for people in need and those who can help out. Bards weave and strengthen the collective fabric of social conventions and interactions. Inclusiveness is important and they are particularly sensitive to those who are excluded.

They are masters of transforming reality to story – and viceversa. Their voice and bodies developed over time to contain magic. When they sing or dance, when they move amongst others people grow calm and many gather to listen. Foes will lose everything, even their hearts. Bards are walking enchantments, masters of illusion and charm. One might never know their losing the battle until they wake up - that is if they do. Most are diviners, capable of telling the stories to come.

_________________
Image


Last edited by wolfwood on August 3rd, 2008, 12:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QUIZ Thread
PostPosted: August 2nd, 2008, 7:17 pm 
Offline
Resident Scholar
User avatar

Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:57 am
Posts: 4121
Location: Trier, Germany
Damn it... the term that describes your kind of mage does contain a link, but it leads to some general kinda site. I guess you need to be logged in to see the text of your test again. I think I'll retake the test tomorrow and post the analysis into my respective post.

_________________
42317
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group