You know what's a fun quiz? The Philosophical Health Test via The Philosophers' Magazine: https://www.philosophersmag.com/games !
It measures whether you have any tension in your...um, moral beliefs. FloorNet has only one tension in its beliefs, although it's probably not really a tension cause what do those fancy apes know anyway, right? Still, it is considering adopting Elementary, My Dear Wason as an inverse Voigt-Kampff test for detecting unauthorized primates.
Because the point of an attitudinal survey is to gather data about your attitude. "No opinion" directly undermines this goal, and makes the survey pointless. It also provides an easy out for respondents who don't want to put in the cognitive workload to form and express an opinion, but still want to appear "cooperative" by completing the survey -- sort of a manifestation of the Abilene paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox).
And that's actually the biggest flaw of the Advocates of Small Government's quiz. Not only does it provide a "no opinion" option ("Maybe"), but then it appears to interpret it as a centrist attitude anyway. So, a totally neutral response -- all maybes -- puts the respondent dead center. Or, in the "Libertarian" worldview, half-way to dirty statist. I mean, "Libertarian" evangelism is the whole point of that quiz, so it not surprising that a totally neutral response would be interpreted as proto-statist, it's just bullsh*t is all.
As to "loaded questions," FloorNet went though and answered all the Political Compass questions four times, each time answering exclusively and consistently the same for each question:
All "Strongly Disagree:" https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=0.0&soc=-4.36
All "Disagree:" https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=-0.25&soc=-2.41
All "Agree:" https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=0.38&soc=2.41
All "Strongly Agree:" https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=0.0&soc=4.36
It concludes that the questions on the Political Compass more frequently represent an authoritarian and ever-so-slight right viewpoint. By contrast, if there were an equal number of questions worded so as to represent each quadrant, blanket responses as above should put one dead center in all four instances. Ergo, FloorNet concludes that the specific wording utilized by the Political Compass will cause Left Libertarians and Right Authoritarians to appear more extreme than they actually are.
That touches on the observation of some school of thought in philosophy that I can't quite recall at this point (probably several, actually), which is essentially that reality is both fundamentally subjective and also objective, because in order for something to be observed, criticized, or presented to others, there must, necessarily, be an observer, a critic, or a presenter, both by definition and also in actual fact. There is no science without a scientist; there is no view without a viewer, so to speak.
In some sense, even if we choose what we would say is a neutral perspective, e.g. "chronological" or "topical" or something, we are, in some sense, taking the 4-D reality of some thing or object or idea and compressing it into a chosen narrative, which must, in order to be intelligible and achieve its purpose, flow according to certain patterns within our experience.
Or, to put it more simply, we're all sort of doomed towards different biases, if only because of our own imperfections and limitations of communication, shared knowledge, and understanding of how things work. Or something like that. Vagueness is the key to broad acceptance, lol.
Apparently, I have seven tensions. One was because I chose the wrong answer, one was because I became momentarily dyslexic, and the other five aren't really tensions in my opinion. I like the quiz though. It makes you think. I'll do it and think more at home, since my break is over and that site is terrible on mobile.
Proud to say I finally finished the header to my nation's factbooks (beautification still underway)! Now comes the hard part, actually writing down all the information in a manner pleasant to read. :(
I start to think that you live in North Korea!
here are my results from 9Axes: Fanatico 90% in Progressive and Globalist, 70% in Unitary and Security, Moderate 60% in Democratic, Markets and Militarist, Neutral 50% in Culture and Religion.
Following the philosophical climate I want to bring 3 dilemmas for reflection, and curiosity, to you and whoever else wants to participate.
1 - Congratulations you is a popular figure, and influential in an anarchist government regime, everyone is free and government is non-existent, you are faced with an uncommon scene, where you see two men fighting, you intervene in the fight? (if it does not jump to [##]) after argumentation with them, you discovers that both say that an object of great and unique value belongs to them, clarifying the situation better it is discovered that both are brothers and that the object was given them by their deceased mother. both brothers do not want to share the object and the object itself is indivisible, both seem to care very much about the object, [##] the situation gets tense until one of the man picks up one sharp tool next to he, and fatally strikes the other, even when he knowledge that is dead, he does not appear to be shaken, others present in the scene seem horrified by the unusual situation, there is no government or security force, but there are volunteers from the region, one of the volunteer is a close friend of the dead, and when faced with the situation he kills the other man and stays with the object, an old man among the crowd arrives at you and asks what should be done?
Note that the situation can not be reversed and has already happened. In this case, feelings like anger can create a killer, no matter how trivial being the situation.
Is the only thing that we were born with, not the particular rage, but all the fellings. A baby smiles, you may not know the reason and much less does he, the smile is an expression of feelings that was not previously learned, or will it be?..
And of course, do not use discussing whether the above situation may or may not happen.
This place have or havent prison and laws, is undefined, you can choose, but you have to explain how it came to be, and how it works.
2 - Congratulations you is a popular figure, and influential in an anarchist government regime, everyone is free and government is non-existent, in the face of a new and unknown disease, you and the rest of the people of a small group who apparently not yet been sick, but each day more and more people move to the region, until a debate is made among the inhabitants, one support isolationism, is a woman she says is worried about her childrens getting sick, she says she should deny the entry of these immigrants, this action is possible since they are on an island.(that is convenient!) The island is self-sufficient in food and water, could live isolated, in contrast an immigrant recently arrived, against this idea, proposing that this would be a mistake, still exists several people who did not contract the disease and that can be saved, considering that the island supports all, resources are not the problem here!, it also says that a cure is necessary, and without the communication by boat is impossible that the community helps.
The dilemma is simple, unite with the world and try to develop the cure, risking you on community, or close for its own survival?
To make the situation even more difficult, to be aware that the disease is invisible and that any kind of screening is impossible, the infected do not present symptoms until their death, and the disease is transmitted by telepathic super powers that go through any type of blocking quarantine zone. Is very fictitious, but in the above situation, it is already happening and it is no point in questioning its fidelity.
3 - Congratulations you is a popular figure, and influential in an anarchist government regime, everyone is free and government is non-existent, do you enter a bakery with only two options, a donuts with syrup or cheese-stuffed dough? it is not possible to make another choices at this time, and you really have to choose one of these because your life depends on it, because an agent from a secret organization has poisoned you! and the antidote is in this two options. (The agent has no involvement with the bakery or baker, or with any organization in Kinganaryasia.) The reasons for such are unknown and bla bla bla is no questioning fidelity bla bla bla ... so?
Sorry if the reading was unpleasant or any grammar error, please feel free to correct me at any point. And if possible tell me if my writing was Poor, Bad, Medium or Good or ... incredible and incomparable for a handsome and strong man like me.
#I changed some things, very late, i have to leave in rush for a moment, but hey, sooner than later? right? well now you can understand at least.
Took the long test (this testing is pretty fun!)
Here are the results:
Federal vs. Unitary -- Neutral; 55% to 45%
Democracy vs. Authority -- Democratic; 74% to 26%
Globalist vs. Isolationist -- Globalist; 75% to 25%
Militarist vs. Pacifist -- Moderate Pacifist; 37% to 63%
Security vs. Freedom -- Moderate Freedom; 33% to 67%
Equality vs. Markets -- Extreme Equality; 80% to 20%
Secular vs. Religious -- Moderate Secular; 63% to 37%
Progress vs. Tradition -- Moderate Progressive; 60% to 40%
Assimilationist vs. Multiculturalist -- Multiculturalist; 26% to 74%
What I found interesting is how Progress v. Tradition came out as "Moderate Progressive"; these political tests generally put me much further left than that. I think it's because this test was rather thorough and separated views on equality (where I am recorded as Extreme), from issues surrounding immigration, religion and technology -- and other things that often get lumped in together.
Ooh, another test!
Equality vs. Markets -- Socialist (78% Equality)
Nation vs. World -- Internationalist (78.7% World)
Liberty vs. Authority -- Libertarian (77.3% Liberty)
Tradition vs. Progress -- Very Progressive (79.1% Progress)
Ah... Fewer categories and I'm being called "Very Progressive" again.
It's like being in NSG :p
Congratulations on the good news about your degree! There'll always be a sunny spot for you in Forest, should you choose to return.
I got -5.0,-5.08 on the Political Compass. Hasn't changed much since I last took the quiz except it went a little more left. I guess that makes me a "libertarian socialist" as well, but I don't like ideological word games, so I'll just stick with leftist as a nice umbrella term.
Mine is Economic Left/Right: -4.88, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.18. I like how it's in the centre of the green, very satisfying. I'm a bit surprised by how far left I am, I didn't really expect to be that close to Stalin (quite uncomfortable :P). I guess condensing all economic policies and viewpoints into a single axis is not an exact science, so I'm not too worried. I do think regulating companies is a lot different from controlling the entire economy though, and I think the "are you generally against companies" questions leave a lot of room to cause over generalisation.
That's my issue with the Political Compass. A lot of questions are either too vague or too complicated to give a simple agree/disagree answer. I think the isidewith political quiz is the most in-depth because it gives you a larger array of answers, but it also has A LOT of questions and can take a good half hour to complete.
There appears to be a problem with the security certificate of the forum software (freeflarum), so your browser may display a warning if you try to access our forum. There's nothing wrong with the site though -- if you're using Chrome you can click on "Advanced" and proceed past the warning. Hopefully the issue will be resolved soon.