Yet another quiz to waste your time

Haha! I have broken the curse of scoring straight down the middle on internet quizzes! Apparently my score is not moderate when it comes to the science-religion-progress-extermination worldview compass. Go on, waste some time and try it for yourself. I scored a ‘Carl Sagan’.


18 Responses to “Yet another quiz to waste your time”

  1. I’m one block to the left of Carl Sagan.

    I’m leftist commie scum.

  2. i’m a block down from the sagan…

  3. 10,8 – Mostly I think cos I don’t value anything more than my own life. Yes I’m a witch! Yes I’m a catholic!

  4. On no, whoops I meant 8,10, full marks for science, not so much for humankind

  5. hrmm, 9,6. it seems that i might be a slight hippy. but, then i knew that

  6. 10, 9. One block under Sagan and same as Zen it seems

  7. 100% ‘Carl Sagan’ for me as well. GG Science. GG Humanity.

  8. 5/5 5.5 Closer to the Dalai Lama than anything else…

  9. I’m an 8,10, but only because I don’t think that evolutionary theory can affect biooterrorism. The science of evolution has little effect on most areas of medical research, although this is no reason to send research money to DI. I just don’t see any reason to link the two, beyond knowing that cipro resistant anthrax could be created in the lab. Not exactly a step requiring the input of Dawkins…

  10. well – i was zero,9 – so i was straight down the middle scientific balanced with faith based thinking – but right there ahead of bill clinton in terms of progressive thinking optimism for himankind!

  11. i’m started reading carl sagan myself recently – but felt that his ‘fear’ of anything remotely non-describable by scientific means seemed almost paranoid if you ask me! But then from someone who starts off saying that his most fun childhood experiences were checking out mathematical prime numbers then excuse me if I don’t think that maybe he had a bit of an autistic personality?

  12. hey, one kid’s tedium is another kid’s fun. Personally, I loved any kind of puzzle as a kid, including jigaw, crossword, logic… anything that made me think. I don’t think it’s really a sign of an autistic personality, merely of an analytical mind. Of course, that doesn’t mean that kids who were mostly focused on chasing their siblings with sticks aren’t smart, just that people have different interests.

    Out of curiousity, why do you say that Sagan feared things not describable by science? I haven’t read a whole lot of Sagan, so could you supply a quote?

  13. hm
    it was just that he described things that were non scientific in a totally ‘defensive’ way which smacked a little of phobia of things that weren’t rationally explainable within pre-existing scientific frameworks. But gave no rational or scientific indication of why. For example I would say that your rationale and critique of general non-scientific type things is actually based on some scientific rationale and some indication of at least attempting to critique ‘why’ you didn’t believe in certain things. Ie an intelligent form of skepticism. I thought his scepticism verged on phobic and irrational – using science as an opposing ‘justification’ without in depth analysis of why. Personally I have found that actually ‘science’ can and does explain a lot of things, that some people might say ‘no that’s not scientific’ when actually they just simply might not know the science themselves. I know my doctors have said things to me which were totally pants – when I then found out that they just hadn’t done their research and were just being narrow minded – but they were the ‘doctors’ so they didn’t like me knowing more stuff than them – acting like ‘know it all’ patient, not accepting their drugs etc.
    However re Sagan – most of the stuff that he did say that was positive was actually really good about promoting the joys and wonders of science which is a good thing – but I just think that he didn’t necessarily have to slam non scientific things in order to justify himself. There are lots of different camps within scientific enquiry anyway as I’m sure you’re aware.
    Will dig out some Sagan quotes at some later point.

  14. re doctors and drugs – I was prescribed anti biotics for an illness recently when i told them it was stress related and that I was allergic to anti biotics, and that I needed treatment for stress not drugs I was allergic too. Then I needed a letter from them for a health related claim consequent to that – and then they put down that I had refused the drugs basically implying that I was ‘choosing’ to be ill – and therefore negatively impacting on my claim. ****ers! I am literally considering sueing them. My cousin who is a doctor said that doctors are notorious for wanting to maintain the ego massage relationship with patients who will be in awe of them for their wonderful drugs and I was displaying classic going outside the loop syndrome – so it was like an ego reaction against that. Great! So much for caring doctors!

  15. By the sounds of things, you might enjoy Michael Shermer a little more. He’s an extremely reasonable skeptic who is constantly challenging his own ideas and backs everything up with solid science. I would recommend Why People Believe Wierd Things as a good primer to Shermer (I really should do a book review some time).

  16. Does my result of 6/9 mean that i’m a scientific buff with tendencies to earth concerns or are those numbers a vague reference to a sexual longing?

  17. i think with these sorts of online quizzes, the answers mean whatever you want them to mean 😉

  18. residentRsole Says:

    Well, I scored Carl Sagan. Many years ago I would have scored in the bottom right quadrant. But over the years, I slowly debunked the concept of “what goes around comes around”. This is just not true and there are many counter-examples, especially in the third world.
    Arthur C. Clarke used to have a strong interest in the paranormal but has renounced it now. If there is genuine paranormal phenomena, it’s lost in the blizzard of crap that’s out there. We’ll never find it and, even if we did, we never get the resources to prove it conclusively to skeptics. So, if one does find something, probably better to keep it to oneself.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: