The Taboo quiz was annoying.

It said that it caused no harm at all, then it bitchslaps you and says: "Harm does occur, dumbass". I got all zeroes in it.

I did most of them the other day. I was pretty consistent etc etc

Pretty interesting site.

I'm with you on this.

1 bitten bullet for me:

"You claimed earlier that any being which it is right to call God must want there to be as little suffering in the world as possible. But you say that God could make it so that everything now considered sinful becomes morally acceptable and everything that is now considered morally good becomes sinful. What this means is that God could make the reduction of suffering a sin... yet you've said that God must want to reduce suffering. There is a way out of this, but it means biting a bullet. So you've got to make a choice:"

I still don't think it's a contradiction, but I'll be aware of this.

"A situation arises where you can either save your own child from death or contact the emergency services in order to save the lives of ten other children. You cannot do both, and there is no way to save everyone. Which course of action are you morally obliged to follow?"

Ugh, this one was brutal to imagine having to make the decision.

My score is 83%.

I too got:

Results

Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.00.

Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.

Your Universalising Factor is: -1.

You chose:
Round 1: Take me to the teletransporter!
Round 2: I'll take the silicon!
Round 3: Freeze me!

There are basically three kinds of things which could be required for the continued existence of your self. One is bodily continuity, which actually may require only parts of the body to stay in existence (e.g., the brain). Another is psychological continuity, which requires, for the continued existence of the self, the continuance of your consciousness, by which is meant your thoughts, ideas, memories, plans, beliefs and so on. And the third possibility is the continued existence of some kind of immaterial part of you, which might be called the soul. It may, of course, be the case that a combination of one or more types of these continuity is required for you to survive.

Your choices are consistent with the theory known as psychological reductionism. On this view, all that is required for the continued existence of the self is psychological continuity. Your three choices show that this is what you see as central to your sense of self, not any attachment to a particular substance, be it your body, brain or soul. However, some would say that you have not survived at all, but fallen foul of a terrible error. In the teletransporter case, for example, was it really you that travelled to Mars or is it more correct to say that a clone or copy of you was made on Mars, while you were destroyed?

That last line is kinda creepy.

Indeed.  I mean... as horrible as the horrible things are in the world.  If everything was perfect, or we lived in a world where action directly translated into reward....

those would be even worse worlds to lvie in.

Well you wouldn't really even be living.

@habfan. Thats not really creepy at all if you think of what 'you' (as in your mind) really are. Its just a state of a certain set of chemicals and electrical signals, thus destroying yourself and recreating yourself perfectly would be just as much a continuation of what you are as staying in your current body.

Cool website.

I did the Staying Alive and got the same result as Vagabond, so I agree with what's been said here.

I mean, teletransporters... I'll stay away from em, thanks. It's basically like the cloning device in The Prestige (movie), except the original is more thoroughly destroyed, no?

So if you cloned yourself via a dupe ray or say error in the telereformer... both you's would be you?

Yes.

And interestingly enough there would be no 'real' me, to both it would seem a continuous line of consciousness. Obviously from the point of cloning onwards they would diverge and be different people - but neither more 'me' than the other.

I would say this is only right from the outside observer, but from your perspective definitely not. If you stepped into a teleporter, it made a bunch of noises, and then nothing happened and you were all like "Hey, what's the deal? Is it broken?" and the guy operating said "eh....just a hiccup, it's working ok...in fact you're already there, it's just something on our end. But don't worry, I've got a special tool for situations like this." And you turn around to find him loading a gun and he says "no, no, turn back around, no need to look over here. Just keep staring straight ahead and I'll have this little situation fixed in a jiffy". Do you willingly stand there and say "excellent, I'll be there shortly...so shortly that I am already there!" Or do you get the hell out because the guy is about to blow your fucking brains out.

Which is why I say that my "self" as it were is not ONLY the material make up, but the persistence of that material make up. If that persistence ends, I end, even if there is a completely identical person somewhere else.