?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile My Website Previous Previous Next Next
To err is humane - Which is not unduly obvious, as I am about to explain
dronon
dronon
To err is humane



You fit in with:
Humanism



Your ideals mostly resemble that of a Humanist. Although you do not have a lot of faith, you are devoted to making this world better, in the short time that you have to live. Humanists do not generally believe in an afterlife, and therefore, are committed to making the world a better place for themselves and future generations.


0% scientific.
60% reason-oriented.





Take this quiz at QuizGalaxy.com


Not quite accurate... I'm willing to believe in an afterlive, but I'm unable to conceive of its form or purpose.

Current Mood: frumpy

18 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
thewerewolf From: thewerewolf Date: October 19th, 2005 05:26 am (UTC) (Link)
How can you be 0% scientific AND 60% reason-oriented????
dronon From: dronon Date: October 19th, 2005 05:35 am (UTC) (Link)
I don't know... I may have tried to bump my spirituality a little, but otherwise my mark would've been slightly to the left... not much of a difference and it would still be in the same region. I was surprised at the "reason" part 'cause I know you know how irrational I can be sometimes. But darnit, I like science! And the "making the world better" part, I don't think I actually do much towards that, although philosophically I definitely think that it's better to leave things better off than before.

l337_0n1 From: l337_0n1 Date: October 19th, 2005 08:05 pm (UTC) (Link)

Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Half of all humans are female.
Socrates is human.
Therefore, half of Socrates is female.

This is a rational, but not scientific argument. Reason can draw us to all kinds of wild conclusions. Science is the extra step of testing them to be sure they are accurate. Generally speaking, science and reason go hand in hand.

I suspect the test uses a very strict definition of sceince that 'forbids' any beleif in the supernatural.

We can all be irrational, but I've always found that you tend toward being more reasoned, and rational than most. As for making the world a better place, its something I've noticed you do unconciously. You've always had a knack for 'putting the right peices together'. My brother once described you as a facilitator. He figured you'd be the person in an underground resistance movement who made sure the right people got together with the right equipment to get the job done. While you might not do much apparent 'grunt work', you do a lot to make things better for those around you.
From: (Anonymous) Date: October 19th, 2005 08:21 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

My brother once described you as a facilitator. He figured you'd be the person in an underground resistance movement who made sure the right people got together with the right equipment to get the job done.

Heh.

Ryan would be the spy, Dronon would be a mid-level coordinator, I'd be either a lunatic in R&D or somewhere in explosives manufacture, you'd probably be a hero-type... What would Hiker and Marlos end up as in this resistance-flic? };>

-Deuce
dronon From: dronon Date: October 20th, 2005 05:04 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Ooh, I like this! I think Marlos would be like... "the guy who knows how to get stuff, as long as you don't ask too many questions", or a fence who's not working for either side. Hiker would definitely be the guy making the secret runs, dodging into alleyways, skirting the shadows along walls avoiding spotlights and police patrols.
l337_0n1 From: l337_0n1 Date: October 21st, 2005 02:28 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Yeah, I think you two have the group figured out pretty well. Though, I suspect that Ryan would be doing double duty as both spy, and assassin. :)
thewerewolf From: thewerewolf Date: October 19th, 2005 09:28 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Actually, that's a faulty syllogism.

It looks like you're saying:

Some a is b.
All c is a.
Therefore some c is b.

But in fact, because there is only one Socrates, you're really saying

Some a is b.
Some a is c. (Some humans are Socrates.)
Therefore some c is b.

Which isn't valid. It's quite possble to have two sets c and b which are both subsets of a yet have no overlap at all.
It's invalid to generalise from a single instance.
l337_0n1 From: l337_0n1 Date: October 20th, 2005 02:39 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

You've sort of missed my point. I never said the argument was valid. I was just saying that it makes a certain amount of sense. I was showing how reason could bring you to a false conclusion. I thought it might be a simpler way to illustrate the point I was trying to make, rather than getting into any of the 'God of Gaps' arguments.
dronon From: dronon Date: October 20th, 2005 05:02 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Knowing both of you, I think you two would have great arguments together. You'd finish by either being very happy at having such a good argument, or by wanting to kill each other.
From: cjthomas Date: October 21st, 2005 03:30 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Knowing both of you, I think you two would have great arguments together. You'd finish by either being very happy at having such a good argument, or by wanting to kill each other.

The ladder fits in the garage, darnit, and I can *prove* it! };>

-Deuce
thewerewolf From: thewerewolf Date: October 20th, 2005 07:42 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Heh.. Ok, point taken. I do get the point of your argument - I just felt the example was a little confusing...

But yes, logic (if we assume 'reasoning' and 'logic' go hand in hand) only confirms that the steps of reasoning are sound (which is why I questioned your syllogism - since it was faulty - it didn't really demonstrate this)... but if your axioms are wrong, then the conclusion, while totally valid logically, is completely wrong.

I run into this a lot in discussions of religion. My favourite so far was with a Muslim at work who assures me that what makes Islam different from all other religions is tha it's founded on logic. Needless to say - it didn't take much effort to find the logical flaws... and suspect axioms.

Equally needless to say - he disagreed with me. :)
dronon From: dronon Date: October 20th, 2005 05:09 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

Those are very kind, warm words for you and your brother. Your post actually made me blush! I do have my irrational side though, but when I'm hanging out with you guys at your place it tends not to manifest itself. A lack of triggers. One of the reasons why I like hanging out with you guys!

Still, I'm glad that I'm having an abstract effect, that makes me feel... fulfilled. :-) Thank you, my friend.
l337_0n1 From: l337_0n1 Date: October 21st, 2005 02:26 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Reason And Science, Good Neighbours, But Not Roommates

You're very welcome. Its actually something i have been meaning to tell you for a long time.
From: (Anonymous) Date: October 19th, 2005 08:17 pm (UTC) (Link)
How can you be 0% scientific AND 60% reason-oriented?

Their numbering system is a bit funny. The diagram does a good job of explaining this. The science/spirituality axis goes from 100% science, to 0% science/0% spiritual, to 100% spiritual, so he's actually at the midpoint (what we'd sanely call 50% scientific/50% spiritual).

I'm still not sure what they mean by "scientific", as I'd tend to consider "reason-oriented" a big part of that (scientific method, and all that). The quiz seems to consider it the opposite of "introspective", instead (which explains how they can extend the "Christianity" and "Scientology" boxes all the way to the 100% scientific edge of the viewpoint plane).

-Deuce
thewerewolf From: thewerewolf Date: October 19th, 2005 09:21 pm (UTC) (Link)
Exactly... Oh well, it's a quiz. I suppose it's best not to dwell on it TOO deeply. :)
plonq From: plonq Date: October 19th, 2005 12:39 pm (UTC) (Link)
I first read your mood as "frumple" - which is a perfectly acceptable mood to be in. On the other hand I'm feeling pretty frumpy this morning, so I can get behind that mood.

I was a little surprised by my results in this test as I was expecting to finish somewhere in the agnostic camp. On the other hand, if "atheist" translates as "cynical and jaded" then I suppose that's where I belong.
fetlock From: fetlock Date: October 19th, 2005 06:20 pm (UTC) (Link)
hummm to see that resault its alittle shocking, I always got a hint of speritual feeling off you .
dronon From: dronon Date: October 20th, 2005 05:01 am (UTC) (Link)
Well, I think your nature has a tendency to draw mine out when in company.
18 comments or Leave a comment