Results
Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.33.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.20.
Your Universalising Factor is: 1.00.
What do these results mean?
Are you thinking straight about morality?
There was no inconsistency in the way that you responded to the questions in this activity. You did not evaluate the actions depicted in these scenarios to be across the board wrong. And anyway you indicated that an action can be wrong even if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. However, there is a tension in your responses in that you indicated that you do see harm in at least some of the activities depicted here. Given that the actions described in these scenarios are private and it was specified as clearly as possible that they didn't involve harm, it isn't clear where you think the harm might lie.
Interesting. I came out with a 0.00,0.00, and a -1. No inconsistencies.
Didn't surprise me too much. I happen to believe that nothing much is immoral providedd it does not harm another person. Kind of a whatever floats their boat philosophy. Also tend to believe that morals are determined by society and fluctuate from generation to generation and from society to society. What is considered wrong by one sociaty might be the in-thing for another. Kind of like being a headhunter is considered morally right if one is a headhunter. Of coure I figure he is an immoral sob if he comes after my head.
I've learned a lot about the Harm Principle as Mill described it, and this is a very similar exercise. The question is: is societal opinion, is psychological harm really harm?
The degree to which you answer yes or no definitely impacts your answers on the test; I'd be interested in more posting on this.
4 Comments:
Interesting. I came out with a 0.00,0.00, and a -1. No inconsistencies.
Didn't surprise me too much. I happen to believe that nothing much is immoral providedd it does not harm another person. Kind of a whatever floats their boat philosophy. Also tend to believe that morals are determined by society and fluctuate from generation to generation and from society to society. What is considered wrong by one sociaty might be the in-thing for another. Kind of like being a headhunter is considered morally right if one is a headhunter. Of coure I figure he is an immoral sob if he comes after my head.
I'm thinking of doing some posts on the actual questions, why I think what I think on them.
Figure I'll give it a few days though and let people take the test before I talk about my answers.
Huh. I came out with a 0.13, 0.00, and 1.00.
I've learned a lot about the Harm Principle as Mill described it, and this is a very similar exercise. The question is: is societal opinion, is psychological harm really harm?
The degree to which you answer yes or no definitely impacts your answers on the test; I'd be interested in more posting on this.
Results
Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.03.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.
Your Universalising Factor is: 0.00.
That was a very interesting test.
~nome
Post a Comment
<< Home