• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Social Responsibility Questionnaire

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
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.

Well, that's clearly a case where it's not the same.

I just think we have all sorts of different reasons to think things are "right" and "wrong". We should judge value-system-similarity based on whether people agree that something is right or wrong, not WHY they think that.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Sounds like Se to me.

yeah, and i think it is like Se. they're both action-oriented. Pe wants information to deal with, and action situations give it to us. but i'd agree that Ne wants less physical action than Se. when i say action here, i literally mean any kind of external exchange. Ne likes action in terms of rapid idea changes. paradigm shifts, etc.

i see Ne and Se as parallel processes, so there are a lot of similarities. Ne just deals with theoretical information - what could be there - while Se deals with concrete information - what actually is there.
 

LunarMoon

New member
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
309
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
3
Well, that's clearly a case where it's not the same.

I just think we have all sorts of different reasons to think things are "right" and "wrong". We should judge value-system-similarity based on whether people agree that something is right or wrong, not WHY they think that.

Most psychologists would actually say that the reason for choosing a particular moral choice is far more important than the choice itself. There's a huge difference between someone who steals in order to keep from starving or to even feed their children and someone who steals out of a psychopathic form of natural selection ("they deserved it for being so gullible").
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Most psychologists would actually say that the reason for choosing a particular moral choice is far more important than the choice itself. There's a huge difference between someone who steals in order to keep from starving or to even feed their children and someone who steals out of a psychopathic form of natural selection ("they deserved it for being so gullible").

I see what you're saying, but that doesn't contradict my stance. I think if the moral codes are the same (for example, x is bad, but if y happens, it's more acceptable), we shouldn't care about the reasons. At least when considering the moral compatibility of two people.

I'm not saying the reasoning isn't psychologically relevant, either. Just that if we're judging how "moral" someone is, we should look at the values, not the reasons for the values. It just gets too convoluted that way.
 

Unkindloving

Lungs & Lips Locked
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
2,963
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Enneagram
4w5
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.


:puts on her enfj tap shoes and dances about in a clickity clackity fashion:
At least I will that strangers be left to die, as they are strangers. :laugh:
 

liYA

New member
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
146
My Results

You scored 41 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."

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.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Results
You scored 39 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 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.

Background
Scores on the questionnaire form a scale that tracks the development of reasoning from childhood through to adulthood about social, ethical and moral issues. The original research using this questionnaire was conducted in the United States by Kohlberg and was followed up by John Gibbs, Karen Basinger and Dick Fuller.

Most children make decisions based on the influence of power and authority figures, progressing through an emphasis upon exchange relationships with others, then on to mutual and social expectations.

Some people progress to a level where they base their moral reasoning on universal values. Others become fixed at earlier stages depending upon circumstances. But recent research has suggested that it is possible to change the way you reason about your social responsibilities
 

Falcarius

The Unwieldy Clawed One
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,563
MBTI Type
COOL
Results

You scored 37.5 out of a total of 44.
 
Top