Moral Foundations Test

[Null]

x

Your scores are:
Care 100%
Liberty 75%
Fairness 55.6%
Purity 33.3%
Authority 22.2%
Loyalty 16.7%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[á´…eparted]

Your scores are:

Care 80.6%
Fairness 77.8%
Loyalty 38.9%
Authority 52.8%
Purity 27.8%
Liberty 72.2%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[Forever]

Your scores are:

Care 94.4% Fairness 63.9%
Loyalty 30.6% Authority 50%
Purity 33.3% Liberty 83.3%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Libertarian.

[MENTION=26046]Dyslexxie[/MENTION] I want to see your result for this!

 

[noyo]

Your scores are:
Care 94.4%
Fairness 83.3%
Loyalty 33.3%
Authority 38.9%
Purity 72.2%
Liberty 86.1%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[Ghost]

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[Cellmold]

Your scores are:
Care 33.3%
Fairness 38.9%
Loyalty 38.9%
Authority 58.3%
Purity 41.7%
Liberty 77.8%

Your strongest moral foundation is Liberty.
Your morality is closest to that of a Libertarian.

So far it's mainly a bunch of liberals; to no one's surprise.

Ps: took the type test on there too because could and received ISTJ?

 

[Smilephantomhive]

I also got left-liberal

I find it funny that my authority and liberty results were the same.

 

[EcK]

I think this test is a great idea. as in, it's more interesting than most of the stuff I've seen in the last few years.

But the test in itself is a bit weak in that it only gives 3 denominations and then 'classifies people' as 'close to ' something even when they're not.

If you get 1, left-liberals get 8, others get 10. It's meaningless to say you are 'closest to left liberals' even though it's true.

They should have many more types of political affiliations.

Secondly some of the questions were just silly and made my eyes roll. Which is why I didn't 'react' to them. (gave neutral answer) Because they were so obviously leading I would also have rolled my eyes if someone presented me with that situation IRL.

Secondly I differentiate FAIRNESS and JUSTICE. While I know that the best scenario statistically speaking is for Timmy or whatever his name is to share the money equally for MANY reasons. I still believe that it's 'ok' because who am I to tell Timmy what to do. His father says 'do what u want with it' and he's not breaking any laws.
So my not really 'reacting' to that is not because I don't value fairness, it's because I'm not a judgmental-prick moral nazi.

If Jack wants to tell a homeless guy 'don't talk to me loser': a) its his right to say that, if he's not harassing. b) the homeless guy also could talk to him, if he's not harassing. Yes on a personal level I would think he's a bit of an asshole. Though I don't have an exact context. But that doesn't mean it's my place to be like "well, as the ultimate judge of morals I shall tell whether it's okey or not".

I can just give the homeless guy 20 bucks to lift his mood up and help him out. Or I don't and I just give to a foundation which allows me to give more due to tax deductions. And is going to do more 'good' in the long run. Though I wouldn't feel that 'I feel good' moment and pat myself in the back just as much.

etc. etc.

Also as to the predictive power of the study:
I think most left liberals as they exist in western countries are short sighted idiots. Their definition does not reflect reality. Their definition is essentially, at least 75% of it, the definition of a fair healthy modern world human being. That is really NOT what most left-liberals are in fact. That's like saying that communists 'just want everyone to be equal'. That's retarded, it's forgetting that communism doesn't work because it goes against human nature and presenting it such a reductionist way as to lose most of the definitions' truth value. They might as well have used Zodiac signs and it would have been about as meaningful.

I agree much more with classical liberalism. Which has about nothing to do with left-liberalism as they define it.

 

[Remiel]

Care 77.8%
Fairness 72.2%
Loyalty 38.9%
Authority 36.1%
Purity 33.3%
Liberty 52.8%

 

[Dyslexxie]

Your strongest moral foundation is Liberty.
Your morality is closest to that of a Libertarian.

 

[citizen cane]

Your scores are:
Care 86.1%
Fairness 83.3%
Loyalty 55.6%
Authority 50%
Purity 61.1%
Liberty 52.8%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[fetus]

Care 100%
Fairness 69.4%
Liberty 58.3%
Loyalty 50%
Authority 47.2%
Purity 25%

I got a hundred on care?
And I don't give much of a damn about purity. Pretty accurate.

 

[Tilt]

Liberty
Libertarian

 

[JClassic]

Your scores are:
Care 66.7%
Fairness 41.7%
Loyalty 52.8%
Authority 88.9%
Purity 30.6%
Liberty 61.1%

Your strongest moral foundation is Authority.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[Yama]

Your scores are:
Care 100%
Fairness 69.4%
Loyalty 16.7%
Authority 44.4%
Purity 50%
Liberty 72.2%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

 

[SD45T-2]

I'm a special snowflake!

Your scores are:

Care 80.6%
Fairness 61.1%
Loyalty 61.1%
Authority 61.1%
Purity 77.8%
Liberty 77.8%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Conservative.

 

[Proctor]

Your scores are:
Care 61.1%
Fairness 75%
Loyalty 44.4%
Authority 38.9%
Purity 41.7%
Liberty 69.4%

 

[Proctor]

I think this test is a great idea. as in, it's more interesting than most of the stuff I've seen in the last few years.

But the test in itself is a bit weak in that it only gives 3 denominations and then 'classifies people' as 'close to ' something even when they're not.

If you get 1, left-liberals get 8, others get 10. It's meaningless to say you are 'closest to left liberals' even though it's true.

They should have many more types of political affiliations.

Secondly some of the questions were just silly and made my eyes roll. Which is why I didn't 'react' to them. (gave neutral answer) Because they were so obviously leading I would also have rolled my eyes if someone presented me with that situation IRL.

Secondly I differentiate FAIRNESS and JUSTICE. While I know that the best scenario statistically speaking is for Timmy or whatever his name is to share the money equally for MANY reasons. I still believe that it's 'ok' because who am I to tell Timmy what to do. His father says 'do what u want with it' and he's not breaking any laws.
So my not really 'reacting' to that is not because I don't value fairness, it's because I'm not a judgmental-prick moral nazi.

If Jack wants to tell a homeless guy 'don't talk to me loser': a) its his right to say that, if he's not harassing. b) the homeless guy also could talk to him, if he's not harassing. Yes on a personal level I would think he's a bit of an asshole. Though I don't have an exact context. But that doesn't mean it's my place to be like "well, as the ultimate judge of morals I shall tell whether it's okey or not".

I can just give the homeless guy 20 bucks to lift his mood up and help him out. Or I don't and I just give to a foundation which allows me to give more due to tax deductions. And is going to do more 'good' in the long run. Though I wouldn't feel that 'I feel good' moment and pat myself in the back just as much.

etc. etc.

Also as to the predictive power of the study:
I think most left liberals as they exist in western countries are short sighted idiots. Their definition does not reflect reality. Their definition is essentially, at least 75% of it, the definition of a fair healthy modern world human being. That is really NOT what most left-liberals are in fact. That's like saying that communists 'just want everyone to be equal'. That's retarded, it's forgetting that communism doesn't work because it goes against human nature and presenting it such a reductionist way as to lose most of the definitions' truth value. They might as well have used Zodiac signs and it would have been about as meaningful.

I agree much more with classical liberalism. Which has about nothing to do with left-liberalism as they define it

.

Agreed. Interesting idea but poorly executed. Far too small a pool of political affiliations. I also disliked the choice of okay and not okay. It felt like passing moral judgement on these situations, rather than giving a subjective opinion. Okay, I think Jack was an asshole and I don't agree with his choice of words, but it's not place to condemn him for it.

It's interesting that you mention the case of Timmy and the money. While I thought Tim had every right to do what he wished with the money, I did mark it as slightly not ok. This was mainly because it was such a dick move by the dad. He's giving one of his kids more power over the other, which I thought was shitty parenting. Of course it could be he was trying to teach them a particular lesson. Though still, weird way to go about it.

 

[morganelise48]

How/where do you take this??

 

[Bush]

A group of parents, concerned about their children's risk of obesity, demand that the local store stops selling XL sized candy bars and soft drinks.

People are free to demand whatever they want to demand of an organization. The organization could then accommodate or dismiss them. Do many people actually believe that it's not okay for people to ask for things?

Unless for some reason the phrasing of the questions intentionally asks about the customers' behavior, it'd be more meaningful to ask about the organizations' instead.

Then again, this is apparently a validated, cross-cultural, and robust test. So

Care 91.7%
Fairness 72.2%
Loyalty 8.3%
Authority 36.1%
Purity 19.4%
Liberty 52.8%

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.
Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.​

We all care about care, I guess

But with the caveat above. I responded to the questions as-is. I certainly lean more toward libertarianism.

- - - Updated - - -

How/where do you take this??

For some reason, the link in the OP is really, really small.

Here: Moral Foundations Test