Belief-O-Matic test

Post Reply New Topic

I took the test a long time ago and got the same thing (Theravada ahead of Mahayana) and was also surprised at the time (especially since I am sympathetic to Zen, which is a Mahayana sect), but since then I've learned more about the two types of Buddhism and I think that the test got it right for me. Not that I'm a Buddhist of either type.

1. Mahayana Buddhism (100%)
2. Theravada Buddhism (98%)
3. Neo-Pagan (91%)
4. Secular Humanism (83%)
5. Liberal Quakers (81%)
6. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (77%)
7. Unitarian Universalism (77%)
8. New Age (76%)
9. Sikhism (75%)
10. Taoism (75%)
11. Jainism (70%)
12. New Thought (70%)
13. Nontheist (70%)
14. Orthodox Quaker (70%)
15. Reform Judaism (70%)
16. Scientology (64%)
17. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (62%)
18. Hinduism (61%)
19. Baha'i Faith (58%)
20. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (58%)
21. Islam (58%)
22. Orthodox Judaism (58%)
23. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (48%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (48%)
25. Roman Catholic (48%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (35%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (30%)

Well okay. Don't know anything about Buddhism honestly. I put none of the above for a lot of them tho since I didn't like any of the answers. There should of been a separate option for I don't know/Don't care.

1. Nontheist (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (100%)
3. Unitarian Universalism (86%)
4. Theravada Buddhism (65%)
5. Liberal Quakers (49%)
6. Neo-Pagan (29%)
7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (26%)
8. Taoism (16%)
9. New Age (8%)
10. Baha'i Faith (0%)
11. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (0%)
12. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (0%)
13. Eastern Orthodox (0%)
14. Hinduism (0%)
15. Islam (0%)
16. Jainism (0%)
17. Jehovah's Witness (0%)
18. Mahayana Buddhism (0%)
19. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (0%)
20. New Thought (0%)
21. Orthodox Judaism (0%)
22. Orthodox Quaker (0%)
23. Reform Judaism (0%)
24. Roman Catholic (0%)
25. Scientology (0%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (0%)
27. Sikhism (0%)

1. Secular Humanism (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (89%)
3. Nontheist (77%)
4. Liberal Quakers (74%)
5. Theravada Buddhism (74%)
6. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (58%)
7. Neo-Pagan (58%)
8. New Age (46%)
9. Orthodox Quaker (44%)
10. Taoism (43%)
11. Mahayana Buddhism (39%)
12. Reform Judaism (36%)
13. Sikhism (36%)
14. New Thought (33%)
15. Scientology (32%)
16. Baha'i Faith (29%)
17. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (29%)
18. Jainism (27%)
19. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (25%)
20. Seventh Day Adventist (23%)
21. Hinduism (22%)
22. Jehovah's Witness (22%)
23. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (22%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (19%)
25. Islam (19%)
26. Orthodox Judaism (19%)
27. Roman Catholic (19%)

this is surprisingly accurate. I am technically part of Secular Humanism but i belong to a more radical sect called TransHumanism

I guess the program just gives a score for alignment with each religion for each answer. Some religions just aligns with many answers.

1. Secular Humanism (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (91%)
3. Nontheist (84%)
4. Theravada Buddhism (79%)
5. Liberal Quakers (74%)
6. Neo-Pagan (62%)
7. Taoism (58%)
8. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (57%)
9. Reform Judaism (45%)
10. New Age (41%)
11. Mahayana Buddhism (37%)
12. Orthodox Quaker (37%)
13. Scientology (33%)
14. New Thought (31%)
15. Sikhism (31%)
16. Baha'i Faith (29%)
17. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (25%)
18. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (24%)
19. Jainism (21%)
20. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (20%)
21. Seventh Day Adventist (18%)
22. Eastern Orthodox (14%)
23. Islam (14%)
24. Orthodox Judaism (14%)
25. Roman Catholic (14%)
26. Hinduism (12%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (0%)

1. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (100%)
2. Eastern Orthodox (93%)
3. Roman Catholic (93%)
4. Seventh Day Adventist (86%)
5. Orthodox Quaker (73%)
6. Hinduism (71%)
7. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (65%)
8. Jehovah's Witness (60%)
9. Orthodox Judaism (60%)
10. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (53%)
11. Islam (53%)
12. Jainism (44%)
13. Sikhism (36%)
14. Theravada Buddhism (36%)
15. Baha'i Faith (35%)
16. Mahayana Buddhism (34%)
17. Liberal Quakers (31%)
18. Nontheist (25%)
19. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (24%)
20. New Thought (24%)
21. Unitarian Universalism (23%)
22. Reform Judaism (22%)
23. Scientology (22%)
24. Neo-Pagan (21%)
25. Taoism (14%)
26. New Age (13%)
27. Secular Humanism (4%)

One thing I noticed was that many of the questions had specifically Christian slants in the answers: things having to do specifically with the trinity, and other dogmatic concerns. These are things that probably a large percentage of people who go to church and who have been through catechism/confirmation classes might say they believe, whether they do or not. Maybe a lot of people who go to church might say that they don't really, in their mind-of-minds, believe this nonsense, but just go along without arguing or thinking too deeply about the points. Thus, some Christians might end up disqualifying themselves as Christians, and putting themselves into another category.

For the other religions, there didn't seem to be such litmus tests in the questions. A lot of people who are testing out as Buddhists may be doing so because their overall mindset might be consistent with the basics of Buddhist philosophy. There didn't seem to be any specific questions that would be disqualifying (such as, do you believe that placing gold leaf on Budhha statues will bring you good fortune, or do you believe that sitting around like a zombie will actually be of any benefit?)

Those "disqualifying" questions are not Buddhist beliefs. Of course in any religion you get the lay interpretation which is focused on satisfying wants and needs for health, wealth or progeny. In that sense the priests of all religions worldwide do the same thing. They tie their religion to those desires and the money flows in.

Alan Watts pointed out that sitting is not the only form of zen, even though that's mostly what is done in modern-day Japan. However, it is NOT "sitting around like a zombie." One is fully awake and aware of one's surroundings as well as tuning in to one's inner being. When done properly, the experience can actually be quite thrilling even if it may look boring or uncomfortable to others.

I am surprised that my score for Roman Catholicism was lower than for conservative Protestantism. I noticed low scores for Roman Catholicism on other people's results too, which makes me wonder if the test is biased to produce such low scores for Catholicism.

I tried taking another test on the Belief net web site, and the questions were so poorly phrased that I stopped. It had multiple choice options, but all seemed stuck in the western religious view. I actually like the test we took for this thread. Obviously there are some faults, but generally at least for the top scores it seems to do fairly well in assessing one's personal beliefs compared to some major philosophies and religions.

I just think it's really hard for anyone to believe 100% in Catholic dogma. People are attracted to that denomination because it has bells and smells and saints. It seems more mystical and well...pagan...than Protestantism. The dogma is very clear-cut, though.

Catholicism in practice has a lot of practitioners. Catholicism in theory - I think even the Pope must struggle to follow that 100%.

Well, here is John Safran, checking out Zen Buddhism in Japan

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bniRZSeVQMw[/youtube]

Did Alan Watts ever go into a Zen temple?

yes, he visited most of them I think and wrote extensively. His The Way of Zen is considered a classic introduction for westerners interested in this subject. Alan Watts (1915-1973) was a 20th century scholar and philosopher best known for explaining eastern philosophies to western audiences. I have many audio files totaling about fifty hours of him speaking on different subjects such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, the limitations of language, consciousness, and Christianity. He was very intelligent and a very good speaker. I've listened to these audio files dozens of times at least. I enjoy the first and every subsequent listening and get more out of it each time.

I don't agree with everything Alan Watts said on every subject. However, of all the thousands of books I've read and all the people I've ever listened to, I have realized more from listening to Alan Watts speak than from any other single source. If I hadn't done all that research for decades with thousands of other sources, I might not have had the perspective to realize as much. He is a blast to listen to. I don't enjoy reading his books nearly as much as I do listening to him talk.

Check out some of the many YouTube videos that have excerpts of his work. If you like him, you can get CD's from Amazon or from the official Alan Watts web site. Relevant to this discussion are the "Buddhism: Religion of No Religion" series and the "Myth and Religion" series.

Regarding that video you posted, yeah that is why I have no desire to go to Japan and live in a temple. However, those techniques are methods to get you to realize certain things, and aren't necessary if you realize them by other means. If you think you have to go to Japan to sit for hours and be beaten by a zen master in order to achieve enlightenment or nirvana or what have you, then by all means go. The zen master would be the first to tell you he has nothing to teach. Don't put down what you don't understand though. Please don't turn this into a Buddhism-bashing or Zen-bashing thread.

That's some very misguided material. The Rinzai school is strict, and yeah, some guy off the street would find it a bit weird and incomprehensible. As a piece of comedy, this might work for some types of people, but anyone using this as actual information about Buddhism is being sold short.

If your purpose was to show an obnoxious man being deliberately ignorant, then it was well served.

Agreed. This man's approach is like going to a church, guzzling wine, and saying that the best part of Christianity is nailing guys to planks of wood. And having people take you seriously/think they've learned something about Christianity.

Well, yes, he did that, too.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-3ypen637c[/youtube]

That is really not the same (or what I said), though that looks to be in impressively poor taste as well.