Across families

Philosophical Naturalism and Secular Buddhism

Different families with 11 axes in close agreement — the sort of pairing a quiz weighting only the divine axes would never surface. Mean distance across all seventeen axes: 0.15 (0 would be identical).

Philosophical NaturalismNon-theistic

The claim that the natural world is all there is, argued as a position rather than assumed as a mood. Less interested than humanism in supplying a replacement ethics, and correspondingly less pluralist about what counts as true.

Secular BuddhismBuddhism

The practice and the psychology kept, the cosmology set aside: no literal rebirth, no supernatural claims, no authority beyond what you can test in your own experience. A naturalist reading of the canon rather than a rejection of it.

Where they agree

E3 Locus of belonging
Both sit at an individual choice — a gap of 0.02.
D1 Mechanism of the ultimate good
Both sit at achieved by effort or insight — a gap of 0.03.
B1 Source of truth
Both sit at reason and direct experience — a gap of 0.03.
A2 Personhood
Both sit at impersonal principle or order — a gap of 0.04.
A3 Plurality
Both sit at strictly one — a gap of 0.04.
E2 Origin of the cosmos
Both sit at beginningless or natural — a gap of 0.06.
C3 The human condition
Both sit at leaning ignorant but fundamentally sound and ignorant but fundamentally sound respectively — a gap of 0.07.
B3 Institutional authority
Both sit at individual conscience decides — a gap of 0.07.
C1 Survival of the self
Both sit at ends at death — a gap of 0.08.
B2 Reading of sacred text
Both sit at metaphorical, or no text at all — a gap of 0.10.
A1 Divine reality
Both sit at nothing beyond the natural — a gap of 0.11.

Where they part company

A4 Locus
Philosophical Naturalism: wholly beyond the world. Secular Buddhism: leaning fully present within it. A gap of 0.62 on an axis running from “wholly beyond the world” to “fully present within it”.

All seventeen axes

Axis	Philosophical Naturalism	Secular Buddhism	Gap
A1 Divine reality	nothing beyond the natural	nothing beyond the natural	0.11
A2 Personhood	impersonal principle or order	impersonal principle or order	0.04
A3 Plurality	strictly one	strictly one	0.04
A4 Locus	wholly beyond the world	leaning fully present within it	0.62
B1 Source of truth	reason and direct experience	reason and direct experience	0.03
B2 Reading of sacred text	metaphorical, or no text at all	metaphorical, or no text at all	0.10
B3 Institutional authority	individual conscience decides	individual conscience decides	0.07
C1 Survival of the self	ends at death	ends at death	0.08
C2 Shape of time	one life, then judgment	leaning one life, then judgment	0.20
C3 The human condition	leaning ignorant but fundamentally sound	ignorant but fundamentally sound	0.07
D1 Mechanism of the ultimate good	achieved by effort or insight	achieved by effort or insight	0.03
D2 Centrality of ritual	optional or absent	leaning optional or absent	0.25
D3 The body	leaning to be celebrated	between to be disciplined and to be celebrated	0.30
E1 Exclusivity	between one true path and many valid paths	many valid paths	0.33
E2 Origin of the cosmos	beginningless or natural	beginningless or natural	0.06
E3 Locus of belonging	an individual choice	an individual choice	0.02
E4 Standing of nature	between creation, given for use and animate and itself sacred	between creation, given for use and animate and itself sacred	0.16

Positions for Philosophical Naturalism rest principally on Contemporary philosophical naturalism (Dennett, Sellars, Papineau); for Secular Buddhism, on Batchelor, Buddhism Without Beliefs (1997) and After Buddhism (2015). Per-cell sources are listed on each tradition’s own page.

Which of the two is closer to you?

The questionnaire places your answers on these same axes and ranks all 65 traditions by how closely they match. Take it.