Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-22-2019 10:06 AM
45 online now:
AZPaul3, CosmicChimp, Diomedes, JonF, Meddle, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (7 members, 38 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,542 Year: 3,579/19,786 Month: 574/1,087 Week: 164/212 Day: 6/25 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
345Next
Author Topic:   Political Dimensions
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 16 of 63 (343701)
08-26-2006 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Lykaios
08-26-2006 4:43 PM


Well I am a Creationist but I also accept the TOE as the best explanation out there so far. Also the questions seemed so funny that about all I could do was laugh. Almost all of them were that the question simply had no meaning.

Too funny and too silly to waste time taking.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Lykaios, posted 08-26-2006 4:43 PM Lykaios has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member (Idle past 12 days)
Posts: 6531
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


Message 17 of 63 (343725)
08-26-2006 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Lykaios
08-26-2006 4:43 PM


quote:
If you are an evolutionist, your radicalism would be expected to exceed your tender-mindedness

I'm also a vegetarian. According to the write up with the test results, that correlates with a high tenderness score.

But maybe my vegetarianism and acceptance of evolution cancel each other out, and that is why I'm near the middle (44), eh?


"These monkeys are at once the ugliest and the most beautiful creatures on the planet./ And the monkeys don't want to be monkeys; they want to be something else./ But they're not."
-- Ernie Cline
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Lykaios, posted 08-26-2006 4:43 PM Lykaios has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Lykaios, posted 08-26-2006 8:02 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
Lykaios
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 63 (343754)
08-26-2006 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Chiroptera
08-26-2006 5:57 PM


quote:
But maybe my vegetarianism and acceptance of evolution cancel each other out, and that is why I'm near the middle (44), eh?

Conceivably, although not necessarily; right now the median T-score is currently 42. The question is whether this is a result of restricted sample, or if it's inherent in the questions as they were modified from Eysenck's original wording. I am myself a textbook tough-minded capitalist radical, so most of the people I've contacted to take the text would be expected to have similar views. We won't have a very good idea of whether the test is skewed until we see some dyed-in-the-wool back-to-religion creationists taking the inventory.

(By the way, can you suggest better site I ought to try to find tender-minded types? They don't have to be right-wing; they could also be anti-death penalty, anti-intolerance, pro-UN, lacto-ovo leftists.)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Chiroptera, posted 08-26-2006 5:57 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
Iname
Junior Member (Idle past 1961 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 06-08-2006


Message 19 of 63 (343841)
08-27-2006 1:05 AM


quote:
These scores indicate that you are a conservative; this is the political profile one might associate with a police officer. It appears that you are accepting of religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.

To round out the picture, your attitudes towards economics appear capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as right-wing.


I just decided to put all the answers I believe would fall under right-wing in this test just to see what kind of response it would get. I must say I did not know that police officers were all creationists who hate black people and jews. :D


  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 589 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 20 of 63 (343854)
08-27-2006 1:53 AM


took it yesterday, don't remember the exact scores, but

55 radical,

40ish

42ish

in whatever order they give out the scores. I was labelled a moderate. which is pretty close. I don't know what I am, except for not radical liberal or radical conservative.


All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
    
Modulous
Member (Idle past 181 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 21 of 63 (343870)
08-27-2006 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by nator
08-26-2006 9:07 AM


Re: Crazy
The questions go to either end of the scale, so if you select "strongly agree" for all of them, you should come up in the middle, as it takes an average.

I appreciate that's how it works, but I'm arguing that it is flawed. How can anyone with such extreme and contradictory opinions be fairly labelled moderate? It shows a flaw in the conclusions when it says that the person in question has moderate attitudes towards religion when the opinions put forward were that religious people are all hypocrites, God created the world and that God is just a figment of our imagination.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by nator, posted 08-26-2006 9:07 AM nator has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by kuresu, posted 08-27-2006 3:10 AM Modulous has not yet responded
 Message 23 by Lykaios, posted 08-27-2006 4:58 AM Modulous has not yet responded
 Message 24 by Chiroptera, posted 08-27-2006 12:10 PM Modulous has not yet responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 589 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 22 of 63 (343880)
08-27-2006 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
08-27-2006 2:48 AM


Re: Crazy
but if you put "strongly agree" to the questions such as God created the world, and some others like that,

shouldn't that create the balance?

you're right, it's slightly screwey, but most people who take this test won't pu strongly agree for contradictory statements. In other words, I wouldn't put "strongly agree" for both God didn't create the world and God did create the world.

I think that that might be where the test saves it self--in that people don't normally put the same answer for everything, and that if they do, there scores don't count (?).


All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 08-27-2006 2:48 AM Modulous has not yet responded

    
Lykaios
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 63 (343896)
08-27-2006 4:58 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
08-27-2006 2:48 AM


Re: Crazy
quote:
I appreciate that's how it works, but I'm arguing that it is flawed. How can anyone with such extreme and contradictory opinions be fairly labelled moderate? It shows a flaw in the conclusions when it says that the person in question has moderate attitudes towards religion when the opinions put forward were that religious people are all hypocrites, God created the world and that God is just a figment of our imagination.

Just so! It's unfortunate that the programmers don't seem to have the time or interest required to provide the insane, illiterate, and generally bored with more appropriate results.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 08-27-2006 2:48 AM Modulous has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by RAZD, posted 08-27-2006 2:26 PM Lykaios has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member (Idle past 12 days)
Posts: 6531
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


Message 24 of 63 (343945)
08-27-2006 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
08-27-2006 2:48 AM


Re: Crazy
I did take a personality test once (I think it was the Meyers-Briggs test) that had a built in diagnostic to test for things like getting the bubbles on the score paper out of sync with the test questions.

But I doubt that many simple on-line tests are going to be sophisticated enough to include such diagnostics.


"These monkeys are at once the ugliest and the most beautiful creatures on the planet./ And the monkeys don't want to be monkeys; they want to be something else./ But they're not."
-- Ernie Cline
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 08-27-2006 2:48 AM Modulous has not yet responded

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 3948 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 25 of 63 (343966)
08-27-2006 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lykaios
08-26-2006 12:54 AM


Since I consider that on-line tests are inherently stupid, I thought an experiment might be interesting. I took the test twice, except that I didn't even read the questions. I merely selected "strongly disagree" or "strongly agree" based on alternating the two answers throughout the test. In the first go-around, I selected strongly disagree for the first question, then alternated. For the second, I selected strongly agree.

Interestingly, in spite of what are in fact diametrically opposed answers to each question, the results came out exactly the same in both cases.

quote:
Your scores:
Radicalism: 38 percent

Tenderness: 47 percent

Socialism: 2 percent

These scores indicate that you are a conservative; this is the political profile one might associate with a police officer. It appears that you are accepting of religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.

To round out the picture, your attitudes towards economics appear capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as right-wing.

This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.


Accurate? Nah. Interesting, perhaps. Anyone have an analysis of why absolutely and completely opposite answers would come out with the same results?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lykaios, posted 08-26-2006 12:54 AM Lykaios has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19756
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 26 of 63 (343968)
08-27-2006 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lykaios
08-26-2006 12:54 AM


fake "dimensions"
welcome to the fray Lykaios.

Your scores:

Radicalism: 83 percent

Tenderness: 35 percent

Socialism: 90 percent

These scores indicate that you are a tough-minded radical; this is the political profile one might associate with a liberated atheist. It appears that you are cynical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.

To round out the picture, your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as left-wing.

Now lets talk about the inherent bias towards christianity in the survey, complete with the leading questions regarding judaism and the total lack of any other religious views being included, and questions on a lot of "hot-button" fundamentalists issues.

ie -- non-christian == atheist?

34) Conscientious objectors are traitors to their country, and should be treated accordingly.

As a concientious objector during the vietnam war I am personally insulted by this question. This also gratuitously paints all Amish people as traitors.

49) There is no harm in traveling occasionally without a ticket, if you can get away with it.

Seeing as you can travel to many IF NOT MOST places without being able to GET a ticket for it, to say nothing of being able to "get away with it" when NOT getting one -- and it's associated implications of wilfull wrongdoing -- this question makes no sense when you think about it.

60) The practical man is of more use to society than the thinker.

And of course you can't possibly be both a thinking person and a practical person. This certainly is the implication of many of these "questionable questions" imh(ysa)o.

Secondly, attitudes vary along a tough/tender axis, which appears to distinguish between realistic and pragmatic vs idealistic and trusting individuals.

realistic and pragmatic = tough?
idealistic and trusting = tender?

You can be 83% radical AND 90% socialist AND NOT idealistic? LOL

Something wrong there eh?

... while tough-minded radicals are individualistic and secularist, supporting sexual freedom and believing in evolution. On the tender side, tender-minded conservatives were found to be religious and moralistic, supporting censorship and belief in God, ...

Excuse me? supporting individual freedom is not idealistic, it's pragmatic and realistic? Better tell the conservatives eh?

and the "and believing in evolution" crock comes from where? It's science, folks, not some arcane religion.

Supporting censorship and imposing religious doctrines on others is tender???

Lykaios writes:

... dimensions of political values which appear to underlie differences in people's acceptance of evolution vs. creationism, ...

Or perhaps we should substitute "thinking" and "unthinking" for liberal and conservative in this "analysis" as it could be closer to what is really evaluated.

Or you'll have to put me down as too capable of rational thought to ever be a conservative, which is what this "survey" seems to say.

Garbage of very little real dimensional value, imh(ysa)o.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : tyop

Edited by RAZD, : subtitle


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lykaios, posted 08-26-2006 12:54 AM Lykaios has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by jar, posted 08-27-2006 2:31 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 32 by Lykaios, posted 08-28-2006 1:14 AM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19756
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 27 of 63 (343969)
08-27-2006 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Lykaios
08-27-2006 4:58 AM


Re: Crazy
Just so! It's unfortunate that the programmers don't seem to have the time or interest required to provide the insane, illiterate, and generally bored with more appropriate results.

Or, it doesn't fit the political agenda of the survey.


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Lykaios, posted 08-27-2006 4:58 AM Lykaios has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 28 of 63 (343970)
08-27-2006 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by RAZD
08-27-2006 2:18 PM


Re: fake "dimensions"
It's science, folks, not some arcane religion.

But in this case you have to remember that the "test" is developed and reworded BY a new religion, one started about five years ago by a guy name Hawke or Hawk or such.

The rest of their assumptions, like those you pointed out, are just plain silly.

... while tough-minded radicals are individualistic and secularist, supporting sexual freedom and believing in evolution. On the tender side, tender-minded conservatives were found to be religious and moralistic, supporting censorship and belief in God, ...

That quote alone is enough to leave folk rolling on the ground laughing. The whole idea these days of equating tender-minded with the current crop of conservatives can only be rationalized when you equate tender-minded with "their brains were turned to mush".


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by RAZD, posted 08-27-2006 2:18 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by RAZD, posted 08-27-2006 3:16 PM jar has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19756
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 29 of 63 (343984)
08-27-2006 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by jar
08-27-2006 2:31 PM


Re: fake "dimensions"
A quick google:

Hans J├╝rgen Eysenck, Ph.D., D.Sc. (1916-1997)

this survey is certainly not his, it has nothing to do with the two "dimension" he used according to:
http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/eysenck.html

something is bogus.


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by jar, posted 08-27-2006 2:31 PM jar has not yet responded

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 2192 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 30 of 63 (344082)
08-27-2006 10:27 PM


Radicalism: 56 percent

Tenderness: 42.5 percent

Socialism: 26 percent

Evolution is the best current explanation

Socialism was higher then I expected though.


  
Prev1
2
345Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019