Taboo and Morality Quiz
This is a very interesting quiz, one that actually makes you think. I’d be quite interested in seeing everyone else’s results.
The quiz is here: http://www.philosophersmag.com/bw/games/taboo.htm
My results and description:
Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.33.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.
Your Universalising Factor is: 0.40.
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. Where you have judged an act to be morally problematic, it is likely that you did so because you think that what makes it wrong comes from God or some other source of morality external to nature, society and human judgement. 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. So, in fact, had you thought that the acts described here were entirely wrong there would still be no inconsistency in your moral outlook.
I moralize more than the average which isn’t a surprize; I know I’m a prude. I choose to interfere less (or not at all actually) with people’s actions which also isn’t a surprize as I very much a state and society that doesn’t interfere with people’s choices (regardless of whether I think they are wrong or not). And I am nearly average in my universalizing figure, though just a touch higher than average. I am usually fairly relitivist, and not ashamed of it, but in many cases I suppose I could go either way as this poll showed. Very interesting.
July 11th, 2005 at 10:08 am
That quiz said that my moralising was all over the place. I tend to believe that if something is consensual or harmless to anyone else, it’s not criminal or immoral, although I might find it disgusting. I’m a social libertarian.
July 11th, 2005 at 6:42 pm
The more I think about it, that damn quiz served only to tease anyone who had any moral aversions to anything. Having morals is NOT a bad thing, which, sadly, some people don’t seem to get, as they are so hell-bent on countering those with obvious, strong, overt morals, the kind that bore into the lives of others like a searing hot, unpleasant drill.
Anyway, more to the point, I don’t think people who commit some of these hypotheticals should be imprisoned per se, or anything like that. But, you know, I’m still allowed to believe they shouldn’t do it!
July 15th, 2005 at 9:59 pm
I took the test. Not surprisingly, it said that I was very less interfering than normal. It also said that I was a hypocrite for saying that it’s not morally wrong if no one is harmed, but then saying that I would be bothered in some instances. (Hey, I was just being honest. I WOULD be bothered for some of them; I can’t really help it.) Interesting test, though.