Test your morality

This is an interesting experiment

https://www.bbc.co.uk/labuk/experiments/morality/

​My Results...

Your sense of wrongness is lower than average

You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less ‘wrong’ than the average person in our sample study.

Your score suggests that you are less sensitive than average to actions that go against your personal view of what is right, and that you are therefore probably more tolerant of moral wrongs.

Different factors such as religious belief and personal wealth can influence our attitudes to the action and behaviour of others.

The Test Your Morality experiment is exploring the ‘Human Superorganism Theory’ of morality. This theory states that human society behaves like a single, huge organism. This organism has functions like reproduction, memory and waste removal that have parallels in individual organisms and even individual cells.

In other words, your personal morality may differ from that of other people because you fulfil a different role to them within the superorganism.

If the theory is correct, you are less likely to be one of the people who helps the superorganism deal with threats to its wellbeing by policing the ‘bad’ behaviour of others.

Your sense of anger is lower than average

You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less likely to make you angry than the average person in our sample study.

Your score suggests that you do not generally feel anger when someone goes against your personal view of what is right. This means you are less likely to react in a confrontational manner towards people who do not share your values.

Anger is thought to have evolved as a response to threats from predators. In a social context, anger is common where harm or injury was intentional rather than accidental, and may result in a desire to punish the perpetrator, either physically or by other methods.

Some psychologists think that ‘moral anger’ evolved to encourage retribution against individuals who did not support the wider community and attempted to damage society for their own personal gain.

Your sense of disgust is lower than average

You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less ‘disgusting’ than the average person in our sample study.

Disgust relates to your feeling of revulsion against a person who commits a moral ‘wrong’. The word ‘disgust’ can also relate to something you find physically repellent.

Your score suggests that you do not experience a strong emotional response to issues of right and wrong. You probably rarely feel physically sickened by the immoral actions of other people.

Interestingly, the concept of physical disgust may play a similar role to moral disgust. Some psychologists believe that disgust evolved as a mechanism to help us avoid disease and parasites. Moral disgust may act in a similar way by causing us to avoid people who we perceive as causing society harm.

Your desire to avoid is lower than average

We also looked at your desire to avoid individuals who do things that you don’t agree with. You tended to be less likely to want to ‘avoid’ than the average person in our sample study.

The desire to avoid is thought to be a consequence of being disgusted by someone’s behaviour. Like disgust, avoidance is associated by some psychologists with perceived threats from infection and parasites.

Your score suggests that while you may find some actions morally disgusting, you are less likely to have concerns about interacting with those involved. You may be more tolerant than others in terms of your desire to avoid.

Theories suggest that avoidance plays an important role in helping the human superorganism adapt to different kinds of threat, particularly those associated with ‘social parasites’, or people who try to cheat on their social obligations.

Your desire to punish is lower than average

Finally, we looked at your desire to punish individuals who do things that you don’t agree with. You tended to be less likely to want to ‘punish’ than the average person in our sample study.

Your desire to punish indicates how inclined you are to engage in active retribution against an individual who is doing something you perceive as ‘wrong’. This may be a result of the amount of anger you feel towards them.

Your score suggests that no matter how strongly you may react to moral wrongs, you do not generally feel a desire to see moral ‘justice’ done. You may be less inclined than others to challenge moral wrongdoers.

The Human Superorganism Theory suggests that actively punishing those who do not fulfil their social obligations is one means of regulating social conduct and thus increasing social cohesion.

Oh, and the low levels of disgust was what 'defined' me apparently.

[h=3]YOUR LOW DESIRE TO AVOID[/h]

Your low desire to avoid is your most prominent moral dimension. This is the area in which you differed most from the average person in our pilot study.

This suggests that you are unlikley to avoid people who go against your view of right and wrong. Although you may react strongly to actions which go against your personal moral code, you probably do not often have concerns about the consequences of interacting with moral ‘wrongdoers’.

Wow, it really breaks it down in the city of morals explanation bit.

You and I ended up with broadly the same result Andy! It will be interesting to see how other esteemed posters fare

What a load of nonsense these things are. Only work in a black and white, scenario based situation. Anyone that gives themselves a round of applause for getting the result they think they should be is clearly blagging the answers.

I'm 'disgusted of Hassocks' apparently which surprised me as I tend to think of myself as fairly laissez faire. Interesting quiz, did similar stuff as part of my psychology degree years ago. Think a lot of it is based on Kohlberg's theory of moral development. Some poorly drafted and ambiguous questions though eg 'A prominent academic publishes a book that argues a genocidal event in the country's past never took place'. You dont know from that whether it really took place and he is deliberately lying about it (scumbag), or he is genuinely arguing that some event in the past was a myth (hero swimming against public opinion).

YOUR LOW SENSE OF ANGER

is the most significant feature of your results

Your low sense of anger is your most prominent moral dimension. This is the area in which you differed most from the average person in our pilot study.

This suggests that you do not generally experience a strong emotional response to actions that go against your view or right and wrong. You may be more tolerant to a range of behaviour in society.

Your sense of wrongness is lower than average

You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less ‘wrong’ than the average person in our sample study.

Your score suggests that you are less sensitive than average to actions that go against your personal view of what is right, and that you are therefore probably more tolerant of moral wrongs.

Different factors such as religious belief and personal wealth can influence our attitudes to the action and behaviour of others.

The Test Your Morality experiment is exploring the ‘Human Superorganism Theory’ of morality. This theory states that human society behaves like a single, huge organism. This organism has functions like reproduction, memory and waste removal that have parallels in individual organisms and even individual cells.

In other words, your personal morality may differ from that of other people because you fulfil a different role to them within the superorganism.

If the theory is correct, you are less likely to be one of the people who helps the superorganism deal with threats to its wellbeing by policing the ‘bad’ behaviour of others.

Your sense of anger is lower than average

You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less likely to make you angry than the average person in our sample study.

Your score suggests that you do not generally feel anger when someone goes against your personal view of what is right. This means you are less likely to react in a confrontational manner towards people who do not share your values.

Anger is thought to have evolved as a response to threats from predators. In a social context, anger is common where harm or injury was intentional rather than accidental, and may result in a desire to punish the perpetrator, either physically or by other methods.

Some psychologists think that ‘moral anger’ evolved to encourage retribution against individuals who did not support the wider community and attempted to damage society for their own personal gain.

Your sense of disgust is lower than average

You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less ‘disgusting’ than the average person in our sample study.

Disgust relates to your feeling of revulsion against a person who commits a moral ‘wrong’. The word ‘disgust’ can also relate to something you find physically repellent.

Your score suggests that you do not experience a strong emotional response to issues of right and wrong. You probably rarely feel physically sickened by the immoral actions of other people.

Interestingly, the concept of physical disgust may play a similar role to moral disgust. Some psychologists believe that disgust evolved as a mechanism to help us avoid disease and parasites. Moral disgust may act in a similar way by causing us to avoid people who we perceive as causing society harm.

Your desire to avoid is lower than average

We also looked at your desire to avoid individuals who do things that you don’t agree with. You tended to be less likely to want to ‘avoid’ than the average person in our sample study.

The desire to avoid is thought to be a consequence of being disgusted by someone’s behaviour. Like disgust, avoidance is associated by some psychologists with perceived threats from infection and parasites.

Your score suggests that while you may find some actions morally disgusting, you are less likely to have concerns about interacting with those involved. You may be more tolerant than others in terms of your desire to avoid.

Theories suggest that avoidance plays an important role in helping the human superorganism adapt to different kinds of threat, particularly those associated with ‘social parasites’, or people who try to cheat on their social obligations.

Your desire to punish is lower than average

Finally, we looked at your desire to punish individuals who do things that you don’t agree with. You tended to be less likely to want to ‘punish’ than the average person in our sample study.

Your desire to punish indicates how inclined you are to engage in active retribution against an individual who is doing something you perceive as ‘wrong’. This may be a result of the amount of anger you feel towards them.

Your score suggests that no matter how strongly you may react to moral wrongs, you do not generally feel a desire to see moral ‘justice’ done. You may be less inclined than others to challenge moral wrongdoers.

The Human Superorganism Theory suggests that actively punishing those who do not fulfil their social obligations is one means of regulating social conduct and thus increasing social cohesion.

Rest of my results:

[h=2]Your sense of wrongness is lower than average[/h]You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less ‘wrong’ than the average person in our sample study.

Your score suggests that you are less sensitive than average to actions that go against your personal view of what is right, and that you are therefore probably more tolerant of moral wrongs.

Different factors such as religious belief and personal wealth can influence our attitudes to the action and behaviour of others.

The Test Your Morality experiment is exploring the ‘Human Superorganism Theory’ of morality. This theory states that human society behaves like a single, huge organism. This organism has functions like reproduction, memory and waste removal that have parallels in individual organisms and even individual cells.

In other words, your personal morality may differ from that of other people because you fulfil a different role to them within the superorganism.

If the theory is correct, you are less likely to be one of the people who helps the superorganism deal with threats to its wellbeing by policing the ‘bad’ behaviour of others.

[h=2]Your sense of anger is lower than average[/h]You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less likely to make you angry than the average person in our sample study.

Your score suggests that you do not generally feel anger when someone goes against your personal view of what is right. This means you are less likely to react in a confrontational manner towards people who do not share your values.

Anger is thought to have evolved as a response to threats from predators. In a social context, anger is common where harm or injury was intentional rather than accidental, and may result in a desire to punish the perpetrator, either physically or by other methods.

Some psychologists think that ‘moral anger’ evolved to encourage retribution against individuals who did not support the wider community and attempted to damage society for their own personal gain.

[h=2]Warning[/h]The fictional news story you saw near the start of Test Your Morality may have influenced your responses to the moral scenarios in the test. This story was designed to arouse moral concerns specifically related to one of the functions that keep the ‘human superorganism’ working properly. It may have affected the way you rated scenarios.

This news story was included in the test to help our scientists discover more about what influences a person’s response to moral scenarios. Your story was randomly selected from a group of stories but other participants will have seen different news stories.

Thank you for participating!

[h=2]Your sense of disgust is lower than average[/h]You tended to rate the scenarios in the test as less ‘disgusting’ than the average person in our sample study.

Disgust relates to your feeling of revulsion against a person who commits a moral ‘wrong’. The word ‘disgust’ can also relate to something you find physically repellent.

Your score suggests that you do not experience a strong emotional response to issues of right and wrong. You probably rarely feel physically sickened by the immoral actions of other people.

Interestingly, the concept of physical disgust may play a similar role to moral disgust. Some psychologists believe that disgust evolved as a mechanism to help us avoid disease and parasites. Moral disgust may act in a similar way by causing us to avoid people who we perceive as causing society harm.

[h=2]Your desire to avoid is lower than average[/h]We also looked at your desire to avoid individuals who do things that you don’t agree with. You tended to be less likely to want to ‘avoid’ than the average person in our sample study.

The desire to avoid is thought to be a consequence of being disgusted by someone’s behaviour. Like disgust, avoidance is associated by some psychologists with perceived threats from infection and parasites.

Your score suggests that while you may find some actions morally disgusting, you are less likely to have concerns about interacting with those involved. You may be more tolerant than others in terms of your desire to avoid.

Theories suggest that avoidance plays an important role in helping the human superorganism adapt to different kinds of threat, particularly those associated with ‘social parasites’, or people who try to cheat on their social obligations.

[h=2]Your desire to punish is lower than average[/h]Finally, we looked at your desire to punish individuals who do things that you don’t agree with. You tended to be less likely to want to ‘punish’ than the average person in our sample study.

Your desire to punish indicates how inclined you are to engage in active retribution against an individual who is doing something you perceive as ‘wrong’. This may be a result of the amount of anger you feel towards them.

Your score suggests that no matter how strongly you may react to moral wrongs, you do not generally feel a desire to see moral ‘justice’ done. You may be less inclined than others to challenge moral wrongdoers.

The Human Superorganism Theory suggests that actively punishing those who do not fulfil their social obligations is one means of regulating social conduct and thus increasing social cohesion.

Your personal moral response to each of the scenarios may differ from that of other people because you fulfil a different role to them within the 'human superorganism'. Find out more about this theory in the next section 'Are you part of the human superorganism?'.

I'm 'disgusted of Hassocks' apparently which surprised me as I tend to think of myself as fairly laissez faire. Interesting quiz, did similar stuff as part of my psychology degree years ago. Think a lot of it is based on Kohlberg's theory of moral development. Some poorly drafted and ambiguous questions though eg 'A prominent academic publishes a book that argues a genocidal event in the country's past never took place'. You dont know from that whether it really took place and he is lying about it, or he is genuinely arguing that some event in the past was a myth.

I stalled a bit on that question as I tried ot work out what they were saying. In the end I just took it as about Holocaust denial.

I stalled a bit on that question as I tried ot work out what they were saying. In the end I just took it as about Holocaust denial.

Same for me!

I stalled a bit on that question as I tried ot work out what they were saying. In the end I just took it as about Holocaust denial.

Likewise.

I stalled a bit on that question as I tried ot work out what they were saying. In the end I just took it as about Holocaust denial.

Thats the approach I took. Thats the problem though - its supposed to be an abstract question about morality, and instead everyone is thinking about whether that right wing historian holocaust denier was right or wrong, which skews the results.

Thats the approach I took. Thats the problem though - its supposed to be an abstract question about morality, and instead everyone is thinking about whether that right wing historian holocaust denier was right or wrong, which skews the results.

In the end, I went for quite low on the wrong scale(as I did on a lot of the questions, as I don't believe there is necessarily absolute morality, just standards that we as humans should aspire to be and also if I support free speech, I have to let everyone have their say. Also, he was only using words, not physical violence), but very high on the anger and disgust scale as to ignore all the facts is absolutely ridiculous and damn right insulting to those who suffered horribly during it.

I just wish they hadn't used the word 'disgusting'. Totally inappropriate use of the word IMO. (Actually the article on the BBC website that links to this test discusses the use of the word).

In the end, I went for quite low on the wrong scale(as I did on a lot of the questions, as I don't believe there is necessarily absolute morality, just standards that we as humans should aspire to be and also if I support free speech, I have to let everyone have their say. Also, he was only using words, not physical violence), but very high on the anger and disgust scale as to ignore all the facts is absolutely ridiculous and damn right insulting to those who suffered horribly during it.

This is how I approached this particular question too.

I just wish they hadn't used the word 'disgusting'. Totally inappropriate use of the word IMO. (Actually the article on the BBC website that links to this test discusses the use of the word).

I agree, I sometimes was thinking I don't like that, but I'm not actually disgusted by it as in physically repulsed. But I guess that is what angry was there for.

just finished the test.

my high desire to punish is the most significant feature of my results!

I guess it questions if the 'average' person can differentiate between Disgusting and Angry, I imagine a lot of people went for 8-10 for both.

What a load of nonsense these things are. Only work in a black and white, scenario based situation. Anyone that gives themselves a round of applause for getting the result they think they should be is clearly blagging the answers.

You're a real intellectual aren't you!

Similar results to a few on here, lower than average for everything, mainly lower in 'desire to punish'.

This is an interesting experiment

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/labuk/experiments/morality/

I got a "low sense of" for everything. Incredibly an incredibly low sense of anger ... er, LOL!

What a load of nonsense these things are. Only work in a black and white, scenario based situation. Anyone that gives themselves a round of applause for getting the result they think they should be is clearly blagging the answers.

Agree, its nonsense- the scenario-based questions can't be answered without more facts and an understanding of motivation; people are fraudsters -desperate to project an image to themselves and others and there's no agreed upon scale to measure reactions: one person's 10 might be another's 7 etc.

Apparently I have a low sense of anger. Load of nonsense, all sorts makes me angry I just didn't give a sh!t about half their bull**** scenarios.

I can't be arsed to register to find out.

Dam it - he just answered my question

No need, I am surely immoral

Dam it - he just answered my question

Damn not dam. A dam is a barrier that holds water back.

Damn not dam. A dam is a barrier that holds water back.

No one cares I'm afraid.

No one cares I'm afraid.

Especially not Rhett Butler

I got lower than average on everything and was defined by a low desire to avoid. Interestingly I didn't take the genocide question as being about the holocaust - if it was though I would have been a bit harsher. In most if not all the questions though I got frustrated that there wasn't really any background information so you were left judging deeds and actions without knowing what led to them. Tellingly the most punishment I gave out was for the person committing non consensual sex which is obviously wrong - most of the other scenarios were grey areas.

Well i didnt avoid anyone which hopefully makes me a nice person.

I was higher than the average in sense of wrongness and "disgust"; I was lower than the average in wanting to avoid, wanting to punish, and sense of anger.

My most significant trait was a low level of anger.

I knew it, there ARE a lot of below average people posting on Saintsweb.

:lol: