A priori knowledge: yes or no?

Yes, given axioms.

Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism?

Don't know.

Aesthetic value: objective or subjective?

Both.

Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no?

Don't know.

Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism?

Um. Don't know,

External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism?

Non-skeptical realism. If it means what it sounds like it means.

Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will?

It's a stupid term. 'Compatibilism' probably.

God: theism or atheism?

a-

Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism?

Stupid question. But the latter to the extent that there is a difference and possibly the former if their is some implied definition of 'rationalism' that somehow excludes empiricism.

Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism?

Don't know.

Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean?

Don't know.

Logic: classical or non-classical?

I like logic.

Mental content: internalism or externalism?

Still not terms with which I construct my intellectual identity.

Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism?

Realism - but quite probably closer to naive anti-realism than naive realism.

Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism?

Naturalism.

Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism?

Physicalism.

Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism?

Cognitivism.

Moral motivation: internalism or externalism?

Internal, at a guess.

Newcomb's problem: one box or two boxes?

Oooh, a question that actually refers to an actual (counterfactual) decision instead of annoying 'isms' that I don't care about. One!

Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics?

Consequentialism. Mostly.

Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory?

Death to qualia theory. That is all.

Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view?

Hmm... I'm guessing the further fact view. Not because I know what it is but because the other two options aren't quite sufficient.

Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism?

Hmmm.... closer to the libertarianism than the other two. But certainly not enough to identify as libertarian.

Proper names: Fregean or Millian?

No idea.

Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism?

Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death?

Survival.

Time: A-theory or B-theory?

Oh come one... at least word length labels give me a chance at guessing which philosophical position resolves to sane. A and B give me almost nothing!

Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don't switch?

Switch.

Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?

Epistemic?

Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible?

Inconceivable (although I can conceive of the mental state of a philosopher who professes belief in zombies.)

===

And... which of the following philosophers do you identify with?

None of them. I don't identify as a philosopher. I'm told that Quine thought sane things though so I wouldn't be insulted by the comparison. Many of those names have an aversive association to me due to the way they quoted by 'intellectuals'.

My takeaway from this post: Lesswrong is not an offshoot of mainstream philosophy. If it was I wouldn't be able to understand everything on it while at the same time being unfamiliar with the countless isms that make up 'philosophy'.