This time, on the other hand, I ended up at -5.38/-6.72. Which probably just goes to prove that I’ve exaggerated my opinions when I’ve taken the test before.
..
Anyway, the more interesting discovery I made is that I found it hard to answer a lot of the questions. They were all very general, principle based questions, and at practically every question, I wanted to know more about the context, or I wanted to reserve my answer against extreme interpretations.
Posts
I, too, miss the context in lots of these questions. I retook it now, and one such simple example is this: “Mothers may have careers, but their first duty is to be homemakers.”
I do think their first duty is to be homemakers. However, I also think fathers’ first duty is to be homemakers. Thus, if I say I “agree”, I will imply that I’m for a division of duties between genders which I’m not for, but if I say I “disagree”, I will imply that I consider careers more important than homemaking.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-3.00&soc=-2.10
Apparently, I’ve grown more just a tad moe extremist since I last took this test, three years ago. (Then, I was -1/-0,8 , if I remember correctly)
Oh, well. I’m still morally slippery enough.
22. September 2006 @ 17:53 ( Permalink )