2 dimensional Political test

Post Reply New Topic

4
7

5- maybe it's my AS, but altruism doesn't come naturally

2- depends on whether the behavior affects someone else

for goodness of people: 6 if going by the definition given, 3 - 4 by actions
for means: 2 for the little, day-to-day things, 5 for the big issues

circumstance is key. The nazi's upstairs and stuck with a crying baby in a cellar with 20 other jews, do you sacrifice the child to keep alive the other 20 people in there with you or not. The (means)sacrificing of your child so that (ends)others may live, including yourself who can then go on to bring more lives into this world and do good in this lifetime can be justified, but again, context determines morality.

For the definition of goodness provided, 6, but goodness is pointless if its only felt. Do people behave good? I give that a 3 - 4. We're born innocent with more of a predisposition to evil then good. A 1 year old baby that keeps mommy and daddy sex-less for weeks may be innocent but what its doing isn't good either. Excusable... justifiable... understandable, sure. But not good.

Which is more evil - a month without sex or a week without cheese?

Neither has a moral value, so neither is more evil than the other.

1) 5
2) 2

4
2

2 and 2.

for me

for pychohist

y=ends and means
x=the goodness of folks
apologies to M&C could not graph ranges.

Not the world's most useful link.

Step 1. I extracted the usable portion

Step 2. went there, saw an image.

Step 3. the image being too small, I copied it and pasted it where I could enlarge it.

Step 4. I noted the neatly separated clusters, especially the tight cluster at the bottom

Resolution proved inadequate for reading which do ewas whose. Who is the isolate off in right field? Do we assume x = people +/- OK?

fixed it

@Vex
distance every thing above 2 is cut off
your closet neighbor is ruvyen