Is a belief in God rationally consistent? Battleground God by TPM (The Philosopher’s Magazine) is a set of (presumably) branching questions designed to test how consistent your belief in God is. I got caught in a contradiction around justifying belief based on inner conviction (how can inner conviction be a source of belief if madmen are so convinced) which demonstrates how such a hypertext can be thought provoking and annoying.
What is strange about the “battleground” is the that contradiction is represented as “health.” Since when is consistency healthy?
Alltogether a good example of interactivity for philosophy, something rare indeed.