|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Are You an Authoritarian? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer was just called to my attention by Lithodid-Man in Message 50. It purports to explain why even logic and facts fail to convince religious fundamentalists. At the heart of Altemeyer's ideas lies the concept of authoritarianism, which he describes like this on page 2:
Altemeyer writes: Authoritarianism is something authoritarian followers and authoritarian leaders cook up between themselves. It happens when the followers submit too much to the leaders, trust them too much, and give them too much leeway to do whatever they want--which often is something undemocratic, tyrannical and brutal. In my day, authoritarian fascist and authoritarian communist dictatorships posed the biggest threats to democracies, and eventually lost to them in wars both hot and cold. But authoritarianism itself has not disappeared, and I'm going to present the case in this book that the greatest threat to American democracy today arises from a militant authoritarianism that has become a cancer upon the nation. Altemeyer has developed what he calls the RWA scale, which measures receptivity to authoritarian influences, and he's devised a simple test, which I reproduce here:
Altemeyer's RWA Test writes: This survey is part of an investigation of general public opinion concerning a variety of social issues. You will probably find that you agree with some of the statements, and disagree with others, to varying extents. Please indicate your reaction to each statement on the line to the left of each item according to the following scale:
Write down a -4 if you very strongly disagree with the statement. Write down a -3 if you strongly disagree with the statement. Write down a -2 if you moderately disagree with the statement. Write down a -1 if you slightly disagree with the statement. Write down a +1 if you slightly agree with the statement. Write down a +2 if you moderately agree with the statement. Write down a +3 if you strongly agree with the statement. Write down a +4 if you very strongly agree with the statement. If you feel exactly and precisely neutral about an item, write down a 0. ("Dr. Bob" to reader: We’ll probably stay friends longer if you read this paragraph.) Important: You may find that you sometimes have different reactions to different parts of a statement. For example, you might very strongly disagree ("-4") with one idea in a statement, but slightly agree ("+1") with another idea in the same item. When this happens, please combine your reactions, and write down how you feel on balance (a "-3" in this case).
To score the test, go to page 13 of Altemeyer's book, the link is at the top of this message. I scored 44. Are you an authoritarian? Take the test and find out! --Percy Edited by Percy, : Fix link.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Hi Ned,
Apologies about the link to Altemeyer's book, it works now, here it is again: The Authoritarians.
1. It isn't hard to see how to mess with the results. 2. There are some questions that are more about political or other beliefs than just your attitude to authority. Right you are, and Altemeyer is aware of this. Beginning on page 13 he says, "Let me give you three compelling reasons why you should treat your personal score with a grain of salt..." The book's a good and fun read. I hate reading books on-line and I'm already up to page 35. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Fix link.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
If there was anything I got out of Psychology 101 way back in the early 70's, it's that psychology is a very, very mathematical science. It sure wasn't engineering that taught me how to do correlation studies!
Of course, psychology has to live with its now largely discredited historical superstars like Freud and Jung, and so there's the constant suspicion that the hard mathematics hides a soft foundation. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
I didn't think you went overboard in your criticism because there is a branch of psychology (the part that I think of as psychoanalysis, but I'm just a layperson) that is largely responsible for psychology's reputation as a soft science. Sociology is similar in this way, often very rigorous and mathematical but with some portions devoted to ideas with a very soft evidential foundation.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Just for clarification, this is from page 9:
Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these followers rightwing authoritarians. I’m using the word right in one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English riht(pronounced writ) as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what the authorities said. (And when someone did the lawful thing back then, maybe the authorities said, with a John Wayne drawl, You got that riht, pilgrim!) In the paragraph you quoted I think he may have fallen victim to equivocation, using left-wing authoritarians to refer to political left-wingers, right-wing authoritarians to refer to political right wingers, and RWA (standing for Right Wing Authoritarians) to refer to those vulnerable to authority. This is confusing, but I believe you're correct that he's indicating that in the book he's not talking about political left-wing people high on the RWA scale, but about political right-wing people high on the RWA scale. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
This thread has itself proved to be an effective RWA test. Just it's mere existence sent two of our highest scoring RWA members (I feel sure of this even though they were so outraged they never took the test, their sense of righteous indignation is more than enough of an indicator) over the edge, past their breaking point, and into permanent suspension. What amazing predictive power this RWA scale has!!!
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
cavediver writes: Well, in fairness, it's less extreme than I was expecting... Okay, okay, you're right, I was lying. Here's how my chart really came out:
--Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024