Social Responsibility Questionnaire

[redacted]

So a Utilitarian is likely to say things like "Honesty is a standard which everyone should accept" or "Life is sacred"?

LOL---Seems unlikely to me, but OK.

Well, I did miss a few. The "life is sacred" thing wasn't the reasoning I gave, and neither was the honesty thing.

You probably felt the same way as I did on those.

Still, you could defend them from a socially utilitarian perspective in these ways:

Life is sacred -- if people just kill themselves when it's hard, there's all sorts of social disruption and grief, not to mention a loss to the labor pool.

Honesty is a standard which should be accepted -- it's inefficient for people to provide false information, if people base their decisions on something other than the truth, they will bump up against harsh reality at some point and face the consequences anyway. May as well tell them up-front.


I don't necessarily agree with these rationalizations, but I can see the argument for them.

 

[Wonkavision]

Well, I did miss a few. The "life is sacred" thing wasn't the reasoning I gave, and neither was the honesty thing.

You probably felt the same way as I did on those.

Still, you could defend them from a socially utilitarian perspective in these ways:

Life is sacred -- if people just kill themselves when it's hard, there's all sorts of social disruption and grief, not to mention a loss to the labor pool.

Honesty is a standard which should be accepted -- it's inefficient for people to provide false information, if people base their decisions on something other than the truth, they will bump up against harsh reality at some point and face the consequences anyway. May as well tell them up-front.


I don't necessarily agree with these rationalizations, but I can see the argument for them.

LOL.

I think I'm gonna start calling you "Stretch", because you do it constantly---and with real pinache, I might add.

And if I ever murder somebody in the style of O.J. Simpson, I will definitely request your services as a lawyer!

 

[redacted]

LOL.

I think I'm gonna start calling you "Stretch", because you do it constantly---and with real pinache, I might add.

And if I ever murder somebody in the style of O.J. Simpson, I will definitely request your services as a lawyer!

And you say I don't have Ne!!!

 

[Wonkavision]

And you say I don't have Ne!!!

Well, once again, you do not understand Ne.

Ne, when supported by an Introverted Judging function, is oriented toward ACTION, in the REAL WORLD.

It does not generate random silly ideas which serve no purpose--or rationalizations which are too stupid for even the person generating them to agree with.

It generates ideas involving how things can be used in new ways, or combined in new ways and re-purposed---The KEY word being PURPOSE.

It's not generally used for navel-gazing and bullshit artistry--though you have cleverly re-purposed it as such, demonstrating that you are, in fact, an Ne-user, and clearly only in the Auxilliary sense! (aka--you haven't really developed it much)

 

[redacted]

Well, once again, you do not understand Ne.

Ne, when supported by an Introverted Judging function, is oriented toward ACTION, in the REAL WORLD.

It does not generate random silly ideas which serve no purpose--or rationalizations which are too stupid for even the person generating them to agree with.

It generates ideas involving how things can be used in new ways, or combined in new ways and re-purposed---The KEY word being PURPOSE.

It's not generally used for navel-gazing and bullshit artistry--though you have cleverly re-purposed it as such, demonstrating that you are, in fact, an Ne-user, and clearly only in the Auxilliary sense! (aka--you haven't really developed it much)

It's pretty hard for me not to respond to this in a condescending way.

Anyway, not sure I even prefer Ne to Ni... your reasoning is totally off, though.

 

[Wonkavision]

It's pretty hard for me not to respond to this in a condescending way.

Anyway, not sure I even prefer Ne to Ni... your reasoning is totally off, though.

Well, I was being charitable (and intentionally facetious).

Your "use" of Ne is so poor it would not surprise me if it was your Inferior function.

 

[Thalassa]

Well, I was being charitable (and intentionally facetious).

Your "use" of Ne is so poor it would not surprise me if it was your Inferior function.

Are you two the new Sim and Jag?

Would you please just make out already?

 

[skylights]

It does not generate random silly ideas which serve no purpose

who are you kidding?



anyway yeah i'm not sure about utilitarianism. my general beliefs run more kantian than millsian and i still scored high.

maybe i'll just write my answers/rankings. analyze if you please:

1. Think about a time when you have promised something to a friend. How important is it for people to keep promises, if they can, to their friends?
- Important; Your friend might need what you promised them.
-- people change their behaviors based on promises. to renege on a promise could mean potentially screwing over your friend's plans, and thus should be avoided if not precluded by something of great importance.

2. What about keeping a promise to any person? How important is it for people to keep promises, if they can, even to someone they hardly know?
- Important; If everyone kept their word, there would be more openness and harmony.
- if no one kept their word, things would be a pain in the ass. the government would suck (even more) ass.

3. How about keeping a promise to a child? How important is it for parents to keep promises, if they can, to their children?
- Very Important; Children look up to parents and learn from them.
- this answer comes entirely from my class on child development. kids learn via imitation. shitty behavior in adult -> shitty behavior in child. not to mention kids rely on parents for security, and breaking promises totally destroys that. that can mess them up for life. if you don't keep promises to anyone else, i don't really care, but keep them to your kids.

4. How important is it, in general, for people to tell the truth to others?
- Important; It's important for society.
- same as keeping promises to most people. if everyone lied all the time, things would be a pain in the ass.

5. Think about when you have helped your own mother or father. How important is it for children to help parents?
- Important; Helping your parents promotes harmony and will strengthen your relationship with them.
- shows love and appreciation, promotes tight family ties, encourages kids to find value in doing tasks well, etc.

6. A friend of yours needs help and may even die. You are the only one who can save that person. How important is it for someone (without losing his or her own life) to save the life of a friend?
- Important; You should help out of respect and because you should care about your fellow human beings.
- all these answers suck. it's your friend. i assume you want them around.

7. What about saving the life of anyone? How important is it for a person (without losing his or her own life) to save the life of a complete stranger?
- Important; People must help each other for the sake of society.

8. How important is it for a person to live even if they don't want to?
- Important; Under severe circumstances, individuals should be able to choose to die with dignity.
- it's important to keep living long enough to make sure it's not because of depression or something changeable like that. beyond that, i see no reason to hold people here against their will.

9. How important is it for people not to take things which belong to others?
- Important; Respecting the right to property is an obligation that goes along with the privileges of living in a society.

10. How important is it for people to obey the law?
- Important; Laws make order possible in society.

11. How important is it for the courts to send people who break the law to prison?
- Important; In the long run, society must find better solutions than prison.

40/44.

i wish they would reveal what the "right" answers are. higher scorers, you should share

 

[Wonkavision]

i wish they would reveal what the "right" answers are. higher scorers, you should share

Well, it seemed to me as I was taking the test that if you consistently picked answers which were the most altruistic, you would score the highest.

But I didn't actually test that out, so I'm not sure.

There is a bias though, I'm sure of that.

Which makes the test kind of shitty, in my opinion.

 

[Wonkavision]

Are you two the new Sim and Jag?

Would you please just make out already?

If Evan's down with it, so am I.

The patent irrationality of Ti turns me on!

 

[professor goodstain]

 

[EJCC]

i wish they would reveal what the "right" answers are. higher scorers, you should share

What would you consider a "high" score?

Either way, here's mine:

Results

You scored 32 out of a total of 44.

Audience's Scores

1 % 1 % 32 % 66 %

0-11 12-22 23-33 34-44
My Results

Your score puts you in the mature category of social reasoning and the majority of people will have scores in this range. Thinking here transcends the practicalities of one's preferences and exchanges to an emphasis upon social feeling, caring and conduct.

You take into account the consequences of actions for other people, whether for benefit or harm, as a consideration in its own right for deciding how one should act towards others. You emphasise relationships, thinking how you might feel if you were on the receiving end. Empathy is important, as well as compassion.

You are likely to expect others to conform to normally expected conduct, reflecting on "common decency" and will think of the chaos caused by laws being broken. You will value, love and respect others, and appreciate some higher values, as well as speaking of the benefits of a clean conscience or pride.

I feel so old! And I think they assume that I have more empathy than I actually do, because there were a couple of questions where none of the answers were very close to how I felt.

 

[Wonkavision]

anyway yeah i'm not sure about utilitarianism. my general beliefs run more kantian than millsian and i still scored high.

Well, if your general beliefs run more Kantian it wouldn't be surprising that you scored high. It would make sense that you scored high.

Results for a high scorer on this test include this:

Your score puts you in the highest category of social reasoning. You will see ethical and moral values as important to the needs of society and will appeal to basic rights or values. You might say "Honesty is a standard which everyone should accept" or "Life is sacred."

I would say that's pretty Kantian. OR at least, more Kantian than Millsian.

 

[skylights]

OR at least, more Kantian than Millsian.

true. it seems to lean away from hedonism in general.

i think that what annoys me about the quiz is that you could have gone through very sophisticated thought patterns, or know a lot of philosophy, and yet if your beliefs really boil down to religion or some kind of simple rule, you'd probably be judged by the quiz as in a low category of reasoning.

but then, 2/3 of people score in the "highest" category and all but 2% of the rest in the second highest, so i assume that's not really an issue.

EJCC - i think 44 is the highest possible score.

 

[Red Herring]

From Laura (Otto Preminger,1944, 20th Century Fox):

McPherson: Were you in love with Laura Hunt, Mr. Lydecker? Was she in love with you?
Lydecker: Laura considered me the wisest, the wittiest, the most interesting man she'd ever met. And I was in complete accord with her on that point. She thought me also the kindest, the gentlest, the most sympathetic man in the world.
McPherson: Did you agree with her there, too?
Lydecker: McPherson, you won't understand this; but I tried to become the kindest, the gentlest, the most sympathetic man in the world.
McPherson: Have any luck?
Lydecker: Let me put it this way. I should be sincerely sorry to see my neighbors' children devoured by wolves.

 

[highlander]

Results

You scored 42 out of a total of 44.

Your score puts you in the highest category of social reasoning. You will see ethical and moral values as important to the needs of society and will appeal to basic rights or values. You might say "Honesty is a standard which everyone should accept" or "Life is sacred."

 

[Orangey]

Well, once again, you do not understand Ne.

Ne, when supported by an Introverted Judging function, is oriented toward ACTION, in the REAL WORLD.

It does not generate random silly ideas which serve no purpose--or rationalizations which are too stupid for even the person generating them to agree with.

Sounds like Se to me.

 

[Aquarelle]

The title of this thread always makes me chuckle. I love it!!

I thought the test was a bit weird, but for what it's worth it tells me I'm a pretty damn moral bastard.

38.5/44

Your score puts you in the highest category of social reasoning. You will see ethical and moral values as important to the needs of society and will appeal to basic rights or values. You might say "Honesty is a standard which everyone should accept" or "Life is sacred."

Conformity to ethical norms is important to you, in terms of a responsibility, obligation or commitment for all individuals, although you may be willing to consider exceptions in some particular circumstances. You are likely to suggest that with entitlement or privilege comes responsibility.

You will appeal to considerations of responsible character or integrity in others, preferring a consistent or standard practice of behaviour in order to avoid damage to social institutions such as the legal system.

However, you will want to see an adjusted case-by-case application of standards for the sake of fairness to all people. Lastly, you are very likely to appeal to standards of individual or personal conscience, as well as of honour, dignity or integrity.

 

[highlander]

Well, it seemed to me as I was taking the test that if you consistently picked answers which were the most altruistic, you would score the highest.

But I didn't actually test that out, so I'm not sure.

There is a bias though, I'm sure of that.

Which makes the test kind of shitty, in my opinion.

It seems like a reasonable guess but actually, that's not how I answered the questions so I'm not sure that's right. There were a few from an altruistic standpoint that should be very high which I rated as high, for example. An INTJ would probably step back and look at the broader context of the situation and my answers tended to reflect that broader contextual view. I was also completely honest with how I'd actually respond in that situation and why vs. how I'd like to respond or how others would think I should respond.

 

[LunarMoon]

37 of 44

The only question that I marked as “not important” involved whether someone should live if they don’t wish to do so. My reasoning was that it would be extremely cruel to force someone to endure unimaginable physical and emotional pain, when their life is owned by them and no one else.

The problem with any such tests is going to be fact that morals are both culturally and personally subjective. If morality were a science then there would be little conflict in the world.

People have so many different conscious narratives that seem different on the surface. But at a deeper level, I think many people have essentially the same moral stances.

Could you please explain this a bit more? It seems as if you would have to use a fairly vague definition of the word “same” if one were to say that an individual who believes in honor killings and another who is a pacifist have the same moral stance.