Moral Quiz
-
"You are required to send a person a gift, and you have bought a bottle of drink to send to them. However, you discover it is poison and if consumed will cause blindness in the drinker. To replace it with a non-contaminated bottle will cost you UK£10.00. You give the poisoned drink as a gift anyway. Are you morally responsible for the blindness of the drinker?" :wtf: One thing which is quite interesting is the way loyalty is related to morality, and affects your score. To be honest I don't know how I'd react if I discovered my brother had murdered someone, but struggle to believe I would call the police - even though practically it would be the correct and honest thing to do. I scored 100% in the geographical questions (I don't believe the person next door's life is of any more value than a kid in outer Mongolia), but only 38% in the family questions. Perhaps my loyalty and love for my family makes me a hypocrite. Interesting Monday morning post - thanks :)
Look at the world about you and trust to your own convictions. - Ansel Adams
Photography[^]mine was 97% !!!, so I am morally very parsimonious, though I did do it a few months back, so I guess that skews the score. At the beginning, it did say: "You should respond with what you think is the morally right thing to do, which may not be the same as what you would actually do. " I would (simplisticly) value one of my family member's lives over 10/100/1000 people that I didn't know, though I answered the quiz based on what I thought was moral, rather than what I would actually do. So you can end up with a high score, yet, in real life, be completely immoral in your actions. :cool: Does that make it worse in terms of your moral outlook, as in, you consider that something is not morally correct yet you'd do it anyway? How does that place morality in the scheme of things? :~ Debbie
-
69 percent pseudonym67 Neural Dot Net Articles 1-11 Start Here[^]
-
mine was 97% !!!, so I am morally very parsimonious, though I did do it a few months back, so I guess that skews the score. At the beginning, it did say: "You should respond with what you think is the morally right thing to do, which may not be the same as what you would actually do. " I would (simplisticly) value one of my family member's lives over 10/100/1000 people that I didn't know, though I answered the quiz based on what I thought was moral, rather than what I would actually do. So you can end up with a high score, yet, in real life, be completely immoral in your actions. :cool: Does that make it worse in terms of your moral outlook, as in, you consider that something is not morally correct yet you'd do it anyway? How does that place morality in the scheme of things? :~ Debbie
Debs wrote: "You should respond with what you think is the morally right thing to do, which may not be the same as what you would actually do. " That would change the score, which as you say, makes us even more immoral :laugh: We humans are crazy mixed up creatures aren't we?
Look at the world about you and trust to your own convictions. - Ansel Adams
Photography[^] -
Moral Parsimony Score: 71% Geographical distance: 51% Family relatedness: 67% Acts and Omissions: 67% Scale: 100% -- Gnnnnmmmpppppppfffffhhh!
-
I just answer the last selection for eaach one, eg 'not obliged' or 'no' Was that moral to do ? Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
-
I just love those questions about killing 100,000 people to save a million. Or even 1 to save 10. I wouldn't killing 1 to save a million. How did you guys answer those and why did you answer it the way you did? Who am I to make that kind of choice? That one person I killed may have been then next Albert Einstein.
I bleed orange.
-
i couldn't take it, as i felt it was immoral of them to ask for my name and email address. -c CheeseWeasle
-
I got through about 3 or 4 questions then I "got" the quiz. I could see what they were getting at and it bugs me that the people who made up the quiz think they are being tricky. First they ask you if scale matters, if distance matters, etc and then they start sneaking in questions designed to see if you were lying or not when answered the first questions! Also, I answered "not morally obliged" to almost every question. Even though I would help many of the people in the examples. If I felt "morally obliged" to help out then I would be a self-hating, hypocritical, walking nut case. Because I simply don't have enough hours in the day to do all of those altruistic things in the questions. Anyone who answered most of those questions with the "moral highground" answers are either lying, Mother Theresa, or walking around feeling very, very guilty.
-
In fact, your score of 59% is slightly lower than the average score of 66%. This suggests that you have utilised a somewhat wider range of moral principles than average in order to make judgements about the scenarios presented in this test, and that you have, at least on occasion, judged aspects of the acts and circumstances depicted here to be morally relevant that other people consider to be morally irrelevant. yes, I think it is more logical to analyze and make a judgement that is more suited according to the specifics of the circumstances.(less parsimonious) Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
....which is more or less accurate since I believe that nothing's in black and white. :cool: Nick Seng (the programmer formerly known as Notorious SMC)
God, I pity me! - Phoncible P. Bone
Nick Seng wrote: which is more or less accurate since I believe that nothing's in black and white. same here, well said. I think the more parsimonious, the more socialistic they are:laugh: Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
i couldn't take it, as i felt it was immoral of them to ask for my name and email address. -c CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: i couldn't take it, as i felt it was immoral of them to ask for my name and email address. :~ they didn't ask me for my email:suss::-D Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
i couldn't take it, as i felt it was immoral of them to ask for my name and email address. -c CheeseWeasle
-
I got through about 3 or 4 questions then I "got" the quiz. I could see what they were getting at and it bugs me that the people who made up the quiz think they are being tricky. First they ask you if scale matters, if distance matters, etc and then they start sneaking in questions designed to see if you were lying or not when answered the first questions! Also, I answered "not morally obliged" to almost every question. Even though I would help many of the people in the examples. If I felt "morally obliged" to help out then I would be a self-hating, hypocritical, walking nut case. Because I simply don't have enough hours in the day to do all of those altruistic things in the questions. Anyone who answered most of those questions with the "moral highground" answers are either lying, Mother Theresa, or walking around feeling very, very guilty.
Terry O`Nolley wrote: Anyone who answered most of those questions with the "moral highground" answers are either lying, Mother Theresa, or walking around feeling very, very guilty. Or maybe they read the instructions at the beginning where it said: "You should respond with what you think is the morally right thing to do, which may not be the same as what you would actually do. " Debbie
-
I got through about 3 or 4 questions then I "got" the quiz. I could see what they were getting at and it bugs me that the people who made up the quiz think they are being tricky. First they ask you if scale matters, if distance matters, etc and then they start sneaking in questions designed to see if you were lying or not when answered the first questions! Also, I answered "not morally obliged" to almost every question. Even though I would help many of the people in the examples. If I felt "morally obliged" to help out then I would be a self-hating, hypocritical, walking nut case. Because I simply don't have enough hours in the day to do all of those altruistic things in the questions. Anyone who answered most of those questions with the "moral highground" answers are either lying, Mother Theresa, or walking around feeling very, very guilty.
-
Nick Seng wrote: which is more or less accurate since I believe that nothing's in black and white. same here, well said. I think the more parsimonious, the more socialistic they are:laugh: Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
The problem I found with the questions is that I think there is a difference between what I would do and what I think I am morally obligated to do. In most cases I feel no obligation to help. But I may help none the less. Wonder if I am making any sense.... :-)
-
The problem I found with the questions is that I think there is a difference between what I would do and what I think I am morally obligated to do. In most cases I feel no obligation to help. But I may help none the less. Wonder if I am making any sense.... :-)
That was me :-) Didn't realize that I was not logged on.
-
The thing with this is its fairly easy to answer "correctly". Also, the questions are too vague to make real judgements. Like harming someone to help others. What type of help are we talking about? a larger salary? Also, I may answer that I feel strongly obliged to do something, but not really do it. I may feel strongly that it is my obligation to help someone, but for whatever reason I don't follow throughtwith it, and just deal with the guilt. just thoughts. BW "In a world full of people, only some want to fly,Isn't that crazy?" - Seal
-
I got through about 3 or 4 questions then I "got" the quiz. I could see what they were getting at and it bugs me that the people who made up the quiz think they are being tricky. First they ask you if scale matters, if distance matters, etc and then they start sneaking in questions designed to see if you were lying or not when answered the first questions! Also, I answered "not morally obliged" to almost every question. Even though I would help many of the people in the examples. If I felt "morally obliged" to help out then I would be a self-hating, hypocritical, walking nut case. Because I simply don't have enough hours in the day to do all of those altruistic things in the questions. Anyone who answered most of those questions with the "moral highground" answers are either lying, Mother Theresa, or walking around feeling very, very guilty.
Terry O`Nolley wrote: then they start sneaking in questions designed to see if you were lying or not when answered the first questions! Note a lot of quizzes designed by people in HR departments do this, Especially the new ones designed to run on a PC where you can't look back at the answers. My advice to anyone is that they learn to remember how they answered previously. Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: Anyone who answered most of those questions with the "moral highground" answers are either lying, Mother Theresa, or walking around feeling very, very guilty. Or maybe they read the instructions at the beginning where it said: "You should respond with what you think is the morally right thing to do, which may not be the same as what you would actually do. " Debbie
Exactly - if you thought all of those were moral, but didn't incorporate that behaviour into your daily life then you are probably a guilt-ridden basket case. If I truly think something is moral - I act on it. I am not a hypocrite. There is no excuse for thinking something is morally correct, but acting in a different way.