While I have sympathies with existentialism, I can't get over the logical disconnect that the short summary above expresses so well. It starts off with the premise that there "is no greater power" but then personalises the universe with words like "condemned" and "must".

FWIW, I rated as a "Cultural Creative", a result that worries me :)

Hmm. I get the impression I'm giving the "wrong" answers for what I believe, because the questions are worded badly. For instance:

"The idea of god is purely for comfort."

I strongly disagree with that. I reckon that counts me as being religious, when the reason I strongly disagree is that lots of people use religion to manipulate others, rather than purely for comfort.

Another example is where I disagree that humanity has a responsibility to progress. While I think priority should be given to progress, it's not a _responsibility_ that we have.

Anyway, materialist 88%.

I come out as a post-modernist first and then existentialist:

"Postmodernism is the belief in complete open interpretation. You see the universe as a collection of information with varying ways of putting it together. There is no absolute truth for you; even the most hardened facts are open to interpretation. Meaning relies on context and even the language you use to describe things should be subject to analysis."

But actually I disagree with that statement. I agree with Jim that some of the questions are badly worded. Of course, these surveys can never get into the true complexity of these things.

Why does this not aurprise me?