Posts
Comments
That would have been a better choice, perhaps.
I instead gave a numerical answer to the rephrased question "What is the probability that the supernatural figurehead of your chosen belief system will appear to declare total operational success for your side, in our reality or in any afterlife in which you meaningfully believe?"
If that is a reasonable paraphrasing of the average interpretation of the question, I expect a strongly bimodal distribution of answers. Not sure that's useful.
I was disappointed the question was not something more like "what is the probability that humanity's far future descendants / FAI / alien modernoanthropologists will generally hold your religious system to have been a net good influence on humanity and worthy of participation by its members?" That is the most charitable interpretation of "correct" I can think of, sans a literal Judgment Day / Cast Party.
Hello, I'm decloaking from lurker status to say that I took the survey.
Calibration question for the Religious Denomination and P(Religion) questions:
Do the terms "believe" and "correct", respectively, in these questions refer strictly to the supernatural elements of a religion (accuracy of creation story, reification of pantheon, etc.)? Or more broadly over its entire catechism?
In other words, if a virtue ethicist were to feel that Floobian morality is pretty darn sound, but not truly believe that Floob herself literally sang the cosmos into existence... would you call that person a Floobist? Or does a point of disagreement constitute disbelief / incorrectness?
Given the recent example of the Pope coming out in favor of science's version of the origins of everything, I think this is a relevant distinction to draw.