Test your Gullibility Factor

[Lance]

The Gullibility Factor test

I was 64% Free thinker.

Learner
As a Learner, you're smart enough to know better, yet you're still not fully informed about reality. Around 15% of the population are Learners. You have the critical thinking skills to be a truly free individual, but you haven't exercised them enough yet. From time to time, you're still manipulated by the powers that be, although you frequently learn from those mistakes and refuse to be exploited again. You buy things because they are practical, not because they're cool.
If you were in The Matrix, you would have taken the red pill, but you would still be in a state of mild disbelief about the nature of reality. You are essentially unplugged, but still untrained. With more knowledge, you could become a true free thinker.

I'd better be careful. That sounds like I'm well on my way to becoming a woo woo.

Of course, the author of the test may be judging answers based on some woo woo ideas:

Having a baby is a patent violation because the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office routinely grants patents on human gene sequences found in all humans.
TRUE. Patents are now routinely awarded for human gene sequences, animals and even seeds found in nature. One U.S. company was awarded a patent on Basmati rice, a grain that has been grown in India for generations. Monsanto recently applied to patent a pig. Hundreds of individuals and companies now own patents on human genes, meaning they have been granted the right to charge royalties on all gene replication (i.e. making babies). This practice of stealing intellectual property from nature and claiming human ownership is called Biopiracy. See this Wikipedia entry to learn more.

[Candy]

My GF was 58. :?

Learner
As a Learner, you're smart enough to know better, yet you're still not fully informed about reality. Around 15% of the population are Learners. You have the critical thinking skills to be a truly free individual, but you haven't exercised them enough yet. From time to time, you're still manipulated by the powers that be, although you frequently learn from those mistakes and refuse to be exploited again. You buy things because they are practical, not because they're cool.

If you were in The Matrix, you would have taken the red pill, but you would still be in a state of mild disbelief about the nature of reality. You are essentially unplugged, but still untrained. With more knowledge, you could become a true free thinker.

Your architects: You have always been an independent thinker. You rebelled against your parents, schoolteachers and always chose to hang out with smart friends who weren't necessarily that popular to the "in" crowd. Increasingly, you shape your own world by deciding what actions to take based on your own internal drive rather than what society tells you is right.

Action steps: Learn more. Educate yourself through alternative media and cutting-edge books.

[ktesibios]

I got a 76- but that was because it took no time at all to tumble to the author's biases, which provided an answer key nearly as good as if I had stolen it out of his desk.

A game of Trivial Pursuit made up by a black-belt woo-woo is what I'd call it. :x

[Мастер]

I give the author of this test a very high gullibility factor.

[Bob B.]

I got a 76

Free Thinker

Welcome to the top 5%. You're a true free thinker and a person who is well informed about the reality in which you live. Although you may have been easily manipulated earlier in life, you eventually gained lucidity and developed a healthy sense of skepticism that you now automatically apply to your observations and experiences. You are endlessly curious about human behavior and the nature of the universe, and you have one or more lifestyle habits that most people would consider odd or unusual. You are not only of very high intelligence, you are also extremely creative in one or more areas (music, art, software development, inventing, etc.)

In 1945, the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on civilian populations in Japan in order to force Japan's surrender and "save a million lives."
FALSE. Although this was the "official" history taught to U.S. schoolchildren, we now know that the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on an essentially defeated Japan. Japan was, in fact, attempting to initiate surrender negotiations even before the bombs were dropped. The primary purpose of bombing Japan was to demonstrate to the Soviet Union that the United States not only had nuclear weapons, but was willing to use them, thus cementing America's nuclear stance during the ramp-up to the Cold War. This explanation, of course, remains highly debatable, but the fact remains that even U.S. military leaders estimated no more than 50,000 Americans would be lost in a D-Day style assault on Japan. It's a huge number of lives, yes, but nowhere near one million. The two nuclear bombs, by the way, killed at least 200,000 Japanese civilians.

I believe this one is both true and false. Why must there have been only one reason for dropping the bomb, and why must this guy's opinion be the only right one? Furthermore, the author has conveniently left out of his figures the number of Japanese who would have died in an invasion of the homeland, which would have far exceeded the 200,000 killed in the atomic bombings. (About 250,000 people died in the battle for Okinawa.)

[MM_Dandy]

I don't believe that this test accurately reflects how gullible a person may or may not be.

BTW, I scored a 70.

And I am most displeased with what the author had to say about the non-organic dairy and beef industries .

[azazul]

I scored a 55, I believe that means I am more sane than all of you considering this is a woowoo test.

[Lance]

So...

Do you guys remember when the terms "Free Thinker" and "Think outside the box" were still "good"?

[survivalannie]

I got a 97 surprised the heck out of me!

[Superluminal]

I got a 75. I found most of the questions to more opinionated than a real test of gulibility. Candy you got a 58? That reminds me, I have this bridge I'm needing to sell, real cheap. :P

[Candy]

Candy you got a 58? That reminds me, I have this bridge I'm needing to sell, real cheap. :P

Really? :P

[Мастер]

So...

Do you guys remember when the terms "Free Thinker" and "Think outside the box" were still "good"?

"Evidence-free thinker" is more like it...

As others have said, a choice of true/false is a little too simple to describe my position on several of the issues.

They always talk about "free thinking," but they can't stand it when others do it...

[umop ap!sdn]

I scored 61.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I scored a 70.

As others have said, a choice of true/false is a little too simple to describe my position on several of the issues.

I agree. You can't accurately score "free thought", let alone try to shoehorn it into a true/false test. Many of those questions were both true and false.

Of course, I got a "bad vibe" from the author within the first 10 questions. You could tell he was trying to influence you to answer in line with his beliefs on the issues. Definite bias there...

[Lance]

Apparently you are only a "Free Thinker" if you think exactly what and how the author wants you to.

Isn't that the same kind of "freedom" the "free thinkers" claim is so bad?

[Мастер]

As others have said, a choice of true/false is a little too simple to describe my position on several of the issues.

I agree. You can't accurately score "free thought", let alone try to shoehorn it into a true/false test. Many of those questions were both true and false.

Yes, the woos never seem to understand the irony in saying that I am a "free thinker" only if I conform completely...

ToSeek'd! Lance said pretty much the same thing one minute before I did...

[HUb']

al right ? its true i dont know where exactly to post this ?

http://web.pdx.edu/~pdx00782/Forum/phpB ... ?p=687#687

It just makes me wonder
in PHP LAND is ther a way to make
COURIER
the default font
---
in place of whatever
the default
font is?

i did not take the test
I made up my own
10 %'s

[woowoo]

Good evening ladies and gentlemen, I trust we're all well and in the mood for a severe debunking of the following woowoo theorem...

I don't know how to put this, but I got 52... I think it's possible for even debunkers to blindly follow a theory. The idea that something seems ludicrous therefore it must be, or that the poster of said woowoo theory lacks creditablilty... Is one pitfall that debunkers should advoid as they appear to be the "voice of reason". Lest they fall into a pattern of automatically debunking woowoo theories, simply for the sake of debunking.

[Мастер]

Good evening ladies and gentlemen, I trust we're all well and in the mood for a severe debunking of the following woowoo theorem...

I don't know how to put this, but I got 52... I think it's possible for even debunkers to blindly follow a theory. The idea that something seems ludicrous therefore it must be, or that the poster of said woowoo theory lacks creditablilty... Is one pitfall that debunkers should advoid as they appear to be the "voice of reason". Lest they fall into a pattern of automatically debunking woowoo theories, simply for the sake of debunking.

Hello woowoo,

I am not sure I am understanding what you are saying completely, but is the idea that the forces of anti-woowooism sometimes take it too far, and reject things that sound silly but actually turn out ot be true?

If that is not your meaning, then what follows won't make a whole lot of sense. If it is your meaning, then I don't want to debunk it, because I think it is true. There was some extended discussion on this in another thread (I'll have to look it up), but in the presence of imperfect knowledge, there is only a trade-off between two types of errors. Those two types are to remain uncertain when an hypothesis is false, and to reject an hypothesis which is true. If the standard of evidence is set very high, one will commit the first type of error frequently, and remain uncertain about something when there is overwhelming evidence against it. On the other hand, if the standard of evidence is set very low, one will commit the second type of error frequently, and reject hypotheses which turn out to be true.

There is always the trade-off, and I think in the zeal to debunk anything which sounds silly, maybe sometimes anti-woowoos (and perhaps myself also) reject things out of hand which are actually true. In my opinion, the overwhelming majority of that which sounds silly is in fact silly, but if even 0.1% is not, then we have to watch out for the 0.1%.

So, if that is what you meant, then that is what I think about it. If it's not what you meant, then I need a clarification :D

[Lance]

Doesn't anyone see the irony in our self proclaimed "woo woo" getting the best debunker score so far?

[woowoo]

I have spread chaos and confusion amongst the illuminati !. I feel like as if I have achieved my part for freedom fighting everywhere. Let's all hail the great galatic federation of luminous substances !. And all I did was not read the faqs !. I don't mean to rude but if you agree with a woowoo it's the first step to becoming one...

Really lance... Wow, I hadn't looked at it that way...

[Puma]

No comment.

[Mr. Manly]

I got a 91 but only because the questions were so leading and I answered them as I thought a paranoid woo woo would.

[Lance]

I got a 91 but only because the questions were so leading and I answered them as I thought a paranoid woo woo would.

Careful there... That's a good way to lose your jack boots.

[Mr. Manly]

I didn't say I believed the answers, but slumming in GLP for so long most of those topics have come up so I knew which answers would give me "free thinker" status.