Test Your Morality
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» elixireleven replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 11:51am |
 Coolness: 74515 | "theyre not giving enough information about the family itself, what if they're poor or starving with distended bellies and their children are suffering from malnutrition." |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» little_sarah replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 11:53am |
 Coolness: 122115 | yeah- so i think we're sposed to assume it's not that |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Hhm replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:06pm |
| Coolness: 56690 | Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.67.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.50. Your Universalising Factor is: 0.50. ?? |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:13pm |
 Coolness: 340340 | Originally posted by LITTLE SARAH...
and about mr. chicken-fucker, i think there's something very wron gwith an individual who wants to fuck a chicken. it doesn't hurt anyone, but that person is obviously not really thinking straight if they think it's okay to do that. i don't think doing a dead chicken is any sort of natural human instinct. he might be a lil' fucked up in the head, but that doesn't make his actions immoral. i got: Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.08. Your Interference Factor is: 0.00. Your Universalising Factor is: 0.00. There was no inconsistency in the way that you responded to the questions in this activity. You see very little wrong in the actions depicted in these scenarios. And anyway you indicated that an act can be wrong even if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. So, in fact, had you thought that the acts described here were entirely wrong there would still be no inconsistency in your moral outlook. i don't think that morally wrong things need punishment.. since morality is something that each person has and no one has the same set of morals, for me to tell you that your morals are wrong, is infact morally wrong to me. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Hhm replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:14pm |
| Coolness: 56690 | hahahahhaha...
eatin a cat is sick..even more sick if its ur own..but..u gotta do..watcha gotta do.. As for fukin chickens...hahhaha...dats just twisted...seriously...u cant say the guy is attracted to chickens...hes fucked in da head... dat shit aint normal.. All i wanna kno..since when is God a woman??..it said ''She''...when referring to God.. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» elixireleven replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:18pm |
| Coolness: 74515 | if you assume you make an ass out of u and me.
if you and your children were starving to death and the only thing you had to eat was your cat, would you rather die than feed your family because you believe that eating an animal which is incedentally a delicacy in certain parts of the world, amoral? cows are sacred in india. they dont eat beef. yet is accepted in the part of the world readily. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Hhm replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:21pm |
| Coolness: 56690 | im takin ur talkin to me...
but no..i wasnt makin an ass out of you..or me.(hope not..)... I was down with your theory actually... I was serious..id eat a cat if i had no other choice...its meat... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» elixireleven replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:22pm |
| Coolness: 74515 | nono, it was in reference to sarahs post.
damnit im hungry. im not thinking straight any more |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:23pm |
| Coolness: 340340 | you're thinking of eating a stray? |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:29pm |
| Coolness: 340340 | This is turning me on.. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» elixireleven replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:33pm |
| Coolness: 74515 | raw fish and rice actually. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:39pm |
 Coolness: 686265 | I think the test shows some nice paralels to things.
The people with the "highest" moral scores are the ones who are intolerant to diffrent things, and who think that their morals are SO right that they MUST be forced onto others, whereas the people with the "lower" scores are people who are more accepting of diffrent points of views and interpretation. The funny thing is that, I find these questions are TOTALLY off the mark to be a "judge" of a parson's morals. They all deal with recreational activities or personal choices that are taboo, not moral or amoral. A REAL test for morals would be questions along the lines of: You find out that your best friend gets beaten by their parents daily because their parents believe their child is doing wrong and they feel they need to punish them. Is this right or wrong? In these questions, NO ONE got hurt. So what's the point in judging people for being DIFFRENT than the rest of us? Just because you don't understand them doesn't mean you have to hate them, but you SHOULD respect their choices as individuals, just like THEY would respect YOUR choices. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Hhm replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:43pm |
| Coolness: 56690 | i agree..this test have very little to do with morals..its all Taboo..
fuken a chiken.... hahahahha...still cant get over dat one |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» G__ replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:49pm |
| Coolness: 142040 | thanks fred...i was just gonna say, these questions are bunko, they're very poor judges of morality.
i got almost as low a score as fred (just a little higher) but honestly i thought some of the things were wrong, but i couldn't say they were because really, no one is effected byt their actions... how can feeding ones starving family EVER be wrong (unless it's with human meat or perhaps someone elses murdered pet) as fucking twisted as i think having sex with a frozen bird (i bet the chicken was de-thawed, i mean, a FROZEN chicken?) is, i didn't say it was right out wrong, and it's not punishable, and neither country is wrong, even though i DO think thats wrong shits n poops this test |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 12:51pm |
| Coolness: 340340 | if rubbing ice cold snow on your genetals is wrong, then i don't wanna be right. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Violence_Inc replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 1:25pm |
 Coolness: 174765 | Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.83.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.75. Your Universalising Factor is: 0.50. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» G__ replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 1:39pm |
| Coolness: 142040 | jeff ain't down with chicken fucking |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Violence_Inc replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 1:42pm |
| Coolness: 174765 | There was no inconsistency in the way that you responded to the questions in this activity. It is likely that you think that what makes any of these actions morally problematic has to do with God or some other source of morality external to nature, society and human judgement. You indicated that an act can be wrong even if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. There is nothing contradictory then in a claim that the actions depicted in these scenarios are morally problematic. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Mico replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 2:31pm |
 Coolness: 151135 | Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.21.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.25. Your Universalising Factor is: 0.00. Are you thinking straight about morality? There was no inconsistency in the way that you responded to the questions in this activity. You see very little wrong in the actions depicted in these scenarios. And anyway you indicated that an act can be wrong even if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. So, in fact, had you thought that the acts described here were entirely wrong there would still be no inconsistency in your moral outlook. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Zz.ee.vV replied on Thu Feb 26, 2004 @ 4:08pm |
 Coolness: 194700 | Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.08.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.00. Your Universalising Factor is: 0.00. *high5's Eldee & Ian* |
Test Your Morality
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
