Page 1 of 2
#1
http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/morality_play.htm
It's pretty neat.
Post your results if you'd like

Mine are:
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 92%
Geographical distance: Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 72% in this category.
Family relatedness: Your score of 67% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.
Acts and Omissions: Your score of 100% is much higher than the average score of 61% in this category.
Scale: Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 73% in this category.
"Why should we subsidise intellectual curiosity?"
-Ronald Reagan

"Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness."
-George Washington
#2
My results are taking ages to load....ZzZ
Hang on..

Your Moral Parsimony Score is 45%

Geographical Distance - Your score of 18% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category

Family Relatedness - Your score of 35% is a lot lower than the average score of 52% in this category

Acts and Omissions - Your score of 100% is much higher than the average score of 61% in this category.

Scale - Your score of 27% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category


Wow, i'm a mean, mortally-bankrupt old codger!
#3
I got 59%!!!!!

Maybe because I didn't take it too seriously...

"This suggests that you have utilised a somewhat wider range of moral principles than average in order to make judgements about the scenarios presented in this test, and that you have, at least on occasion, judged aspects of the acts and circumstances depicted here to be morally relevant that other people consider to be morally irrelevant."

That's more BS in one sentence than I have read in my entire life.

Why don't we just say that I have no moral principles whatsoever? =P

EDIT: Oh yeah, here's my stats:

Geographical Distance

Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

Family Relatedness

Your score of 67% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions

Your score of 67% is a little higher than the average score of 61% in this category.

Scale

Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category.

I think I may retake the test later... or not.
Signature? What's a signature?

Quote by WlCmToTheJungle
the house burnt down
pics coming soon!
<.<
>,>


Quote by metalscott76
No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Best theory lesson EVER!
Last edited by firebreath07 at May 28, 2008,
#4
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 49%


Geographical Distance

Your score of 83% is somewhat higher than the average score of 72% in this category.

Family Relatedness
Your score of 67% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions

Your score of 18% is much lower than the average score of 61% in this category.

Scale
Your score of 27% is significantly lower than the average score of 73%
Founder of the Mike.h murder case group
Mike.h murder case
This day will go down in Lulzfamy.


Quote by Audio™
The Pit can't even solve what they want for lunch let alone how to save the world.
#11
Moral Parsimony: 88% Your score of 88% is significantly higher than the average score of 64%

Geographical Distance: 100% The suggestion then is that geographical distance plays little, if any, role in your moral thinking.Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 72% in this category.

Family Relatedness: 100% It looks as if issues of family relatedness play have no significant role to play in your thinking about moral issues.Your score of 100% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions: 100% It seems that you do not think that the distinction between acting and omitting to act has any real moral significance.Your score of 100% is much higher than the average score of 61% in this category.


Scale: 51% This suggests that scale, as it is described above, is an important consideration in your moral thinking. To insist on the moral significance of scale is to decrease the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category.
Last edited by G-man05 at May 28, 2008,
#13
Geographical Distance

This category has to do with the impact of geographical distance on the application of moral principles. The idea here is to determine whether moral principles are applied equally when dealing with sets of circumstances and acts that differ only in their geographical location in relation to the person making the judgement.

Your score of 67% is somewhat lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

This suggests that geographical distance is on occasion a relevant factor in your moral thinking. Probably, you tend to feel a somewhat greater moral obligation towards people who are located nearby than towards those who are far away. To the extent that this is so, it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework

Family Relatedness

In this category, we look at the impact of family loyalty and ties on the way in which moral principles are applied. The idea here is to determine whether moral principles are applied without modification or qualification when you're dealing with sets of circumstances and acts that differ only in whether the participants are related through family ties to the person making the judgement.

Your score of 100% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.

It looks as if issues of family relatedness play have no significant role to play in your thinking about moral issues.

Acts and Omissions

This category has to do with whether there is a difference between the moral status of acting and omitting to act where the consequences are the same in both instances. Consider the following example. Let's assume that on the whole it is a bad thing if a person is poisoned whilst drinking a cola drink. One might then ask whether there is a moral difference between poisoning the coke, on the one hand (an act), and failing to prevent a person from drinking a coke someone else has poisoned, when in a position to do so, on the other (an omission). In this category then, the idea is to determine if moral principles are applied equally when you're dealing with sets of circumstances that differ only in whether the participants have acted or omitted to act.

Your score of 67% is a little higher than the average score of 61% in this category.

However, it is not high enough to rule out the possibility that the distinction between acting and omitting to act is a relevant factor in your moral thinking. More than likely you tend to believe that those who act have a slightly greater moral culpability than those who simply omit to act. If this is what you do believe, it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.

Scale

This category has to do with whether scale is a factor in making moral judgements. A simple example will make this clear. Consider a situation where it is possible to save ten lives by sacrificing one life. Is there a moral difference between this choice and one where the numbers of lives involved are different but proportional - for example, saving 100 lives by sacrificing ten? In this category then, the idea is to determine whether moral principles are applied without modification or qualification when you're dealing with sets of circumstances that differ only in their scale, as in the sense described above.

Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 73% in this category.

It seems that scale, as it is described above, is not an important consideration in your moral worldview. But if, contrary to our findings, it is important, then it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.
#15
I got 67% but i accidently chose to save my child on one of the questions. I wanted to save the other children.

But whatever.
#16
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 70%

Geographical Distance
Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 72% in this category.
The suggestion then is that geographical distance plays little, if any, role in your moral thinking.

Family Relatedness
Your score of 100% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.
It looks as if issues of family relatedness play have no significant role to play in your thinking about moral issues.

Acts and Omissions
Your score of 51% is a little lower than the average score of 61% in this category.
This suggests that the distinction between acting and omitting to act is sometimes a relevant factor in your moral thinking. Probably, you tend to believe that those who act have a greater moral culpability than those who simply omit to act. If this is what you believe, it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.

Scale
Your score of 27% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category.
This suggests that scale, as it is described above, is an important consideration in your moral thinking. To insist on the moral significance of scale is to decrease the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.

Hmm. I dislike utilitarianism so I got a bit annoyed with this after a bit.
Last edited by rigiddigits at May 28, 2008,
#17
God. This has to be the slowest thing ever...

EDIT: Ok. Results in.
Moral Parsimony - 67% (compared to average of 64%)
Geographical Distance - 100% (compared to 72%)
Family Relatedness 51%, I accidentally clicked the wrong answer about one of my cousins on this one, so it should probably be higher (compared to 52%)
Acts and Omissions - 67% (compared to 61%)
Scale - 51% (compared to 73%)

DOUBLE EDIT LULZ: I never clicked the "Would you kill 1 person do save 10?" option because I could never get myself to kill a person, I just wouldn't be able to live with it. I find it somewhat of a loaded question because you don't know if that 1 person would be a threat to those 10's lives. If that was the case, then yes I would. But if the other 1 person was innocent who I would have to kill, no, I wouldn't kill them. I assume that is why my scale is lower than average.
Quote by FireandFlames
Your weak mind just cannot comprehend the intense level of awesome that Pokemon is at.
Last edited by Dilweed at May 28, 2008,
#18
How many questions does this thing have?!
I stopped on 16.
Yes I am from Hawaii.


It's not really a great place to live..
..but fun if you're a tourist!
FoTB Duration: June 12, 2008 - July 12, 2008
It's good to be back guys.
#19
EDIT: Your Moral Parsimony Score is 35%

Geographical Distance
Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

Family Relatedness
Your score of 18% is a lot lower than the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions
Your score of 67% is a little higher than the average score of 61% in this category.


That's certainly disappointing.
Last edited by Doppelgänger at May 28, 2008,
#20
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 75%

Your score of 83% is somewhat higher than the average score of 72% in this category.

Your score of 67% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.

Your score of 51% is a little lower than the average score of 61% in this category.

Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 73% in this category
#21
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 39%

Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

Your score of 18% is a lot lower than the average score of 52% in this category.

Your score of 35% is much lower than the average score of 61% in this category.

Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category.

mmm. cool.
Quote by The Spoon
Unless you're sure she likes you, telling her you like her has a 110% chance of failing.

But hey, at least you have a 10% chance of absolutely guaranteeing failure.
#23
53% i shoot from the hip, and calls 'em as i sees 'em.
.
..
...
I have no opinion on this matter.
#24
I failed the test miserably

Your Moral Parsimony Score is 49%

Geographical Distance
Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

Family Relatedness
Your score of 100% is a lot higher than the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions
Your score of 18% is much lower than the average score of 61% in this category.

Scale
Your score of 27% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category.
#25
the same few questions asked repeatedly but worded slightly different, how creative
"A guitar is the human soul, speaking with just six strings..."- Eddie Lee

Irvine Kinneas of the Final Fantasy Elite - PM me, Ichikurosaki, Gallagher2006, or Deliriumbassist to join!
#26
Quote by RU Experienced?
I failed the test miserably

Your Moral Parsimony Score is 49%

its not actually testing you based off your results. its just testing how much you stick to specific moral rules, and if the rules are the same in every situation. your score just means that you are considering each situation independently, not judging every situation by a specific set of guidelines. none of the questions really lent themselves to subjective moral judgments.
.
..
...
I have no opinion on this matter.
#27
Quote by Zugunruhe
its not actually testing you based off your results. its just testing how much you stick to specific moral rules, and if the rules are the same in every situation. your score just means that you are considering each situation independently, not judging every situation by a specific set of guidelines. none of the questions really lent themselves to subjective moral judgments.

Yeah, I posted that before I had read the details - I had just looked at the parsimony score and then went back and read all the little break-downs.
#28
84%

I find it funny that 6% of people answered (in the question where you sabotage something to kill somebody) something other than "Responsible".
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
#30
Quote by Reject_666_6
84%

I find it funny that 6% of people answered (in the question where you sabotage something to kill somebody) something other than "Responsible".


Yeah, that one about making a person lose their legs was ridiculous also...
Quote by FireandFlames
Your weak mind just cannot comprehend the intense level of awesome that Pokemon is at.
#31
Quote by Craigo
This is slowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Far too slow.
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████

You'll Never Walk Alone
#32
It really wasn't slow for me at all. All the questions loaded perfectly fine. Only the results took about 30 seconds to load, and that's not much either. Damn, the Pit is impatient...
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
#33
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 67%

What does this mean?

Moral frameworks can be more or less parsimonious. That is to say, they can employ a wide range of principles, which vary in their application according to circumstances (less parsimonious) or they can employ a small range of principles which apply across a wide range of circumstances without modification (more parsimonious). An example might make this clear. Let's assume that we are committed to the principle that it is a good to reduce suffering. The test of moral parsimony is to see whether this principle is applied simply and without modification or qualification in a number of different circumstances. Supposing, for example, we find that in otherwise identical circumstances, the principle is applied differently if the suffering person is from a different country to our own. This suggests a lack of moral parsimony because a factor which could be taken to be morally irrelevant in an alternative moral framework is here taken to be morally relevant.

How to interpret your score

The higher your percentage score the more parsimonious your moral framework. In other words, a high score is suggestive of a moral framework that comprises a minimal number of moral principles that apply across a range of circumstances and acts. What is a high score? As a rule of thumb, any score above 75% should be considered indicative of a parsimonious moral framework. However, perhaps a better way to think about this is to see how your score compares to other people's scores.
In fact, your score of 67% is not significantly different than the average score of 64%. This suggests that you have utilised an average number of moral principles in order to make judgements about the scenarios presented in this test, and that you have tended to judge similar aspects of the acts and circumstances depicted here to be morally relevant as other people.

Moral Parsimony - good or bad?

We make no judgement about whether moral parsimony is a good or bad thing. Some people will think that on balance it is a good thing and that we should strive to minimise the number of moral principles that form our moral frameworks. Others will suspect that moral parsimony is likely to render moral frameworks simplistic and that an overly parsimonious moral framework will leave us unable to deal with the complexity of real circumstances and acts. We'll leave it up to you to decide who is right.

How was your score calculated?

Your score was calculated by combining and averaging your scores in the four categories that appear below.

Geographical Distance

This category has to do with the impact of geographical distance on the application of moral principles. The idea here is to determine whether moral principles are applied equally when dealing with sets of circumstances and acts that differ only in their geographical location in relation to the person making the judgement.

Your score of 67% is somewhat lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

This suggests that geographical distance is on occasion a relevant factor in your moral thinking. Probably, you tend to feel a somewhat greater moral obligation towards people who are located nearby than towards those who are far away. To the extent that this is so, it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework

Family Relatedness

In this category, we look at the impact of family loyalty and ties on the way in which moral principles are applied. The idea here is to determine whether moral principles are applied without modification or qualification when you're dealing with sets of circumstances and acts that differ only in whether the participants are related through family ties to the person making the judgement.

Your score of 35% is a lot lower than the average score of 52% in this category.

It seems then that family relatedness is an important factor in your moral thinking. Normally, this will mean feeling a greater moral obligation towards people who are related to you than towards those who are not. To the extent that issues of family relatedness form part of your moral thinking, the parsimoniousness of your moral framework is reduced.

Acts and Omissions

This category has to do with whether there is a difference between the moral status of acting and omitting to act where the consequences are the same in both instances. Consider the following example. Let's assume that on the whole it is a bad thing if a person is poisoned whilst drinking a cola drink. One might then ask whether there is a moral difference between poisoning the coke, on the one hand (an act), and failing to prevent a person from drinking a coke someone else has poisoned, when in a position to do so, on the other (an omission). In this category then, the idea is to determine if moral principles are applied equally when you're dealing with sets of circumstances that differ only in whether the participants have acted or omitted to act.

Your score of 67% is a little higher than the average score of 61% in this category.

However, it is not high enough to rule out the possibility that the distinction between acting and omitting to act is a relevant factor in your moral thinking. More than likely you tend to believe that those who act have a slightly greater moral culpability than those who simply omit to act. If this is what you do believe, it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.

Scale

This category has to do with whether scale is a factor in making moral judgements. A simple example will make this clear. Consider a situation where it is possible to save ten lives by sacrificing one life. Is there a moral difference between this choice and one where the numbers of lives involved are different but proportional - for example, saving 100 lives by sacrificing ten? In this category then, the idea is to determine whether moral principles are applied without modification or qualification when you're dealing with sets of circumstances that differ only in their scale, as in the sense described above.

Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 73% in this category.

It seems that scale, as it is described above, is not an important consideration in your moral worldview. But if, contrary to our findings, it is important, then it decreases the parsimoniousness of your moral framework.
Quote by Mr. La Fritz
"all fatties report to the gym!"


Quote by mosh_face

music should only sound like a train running into a wall of BC riches plugged into line 6 spiders
#35
So, 1/2 of the questions have to do with you killing someone to save another person, woudln't all the answers be the same? (I mean, there is virtually no difference in those questions)...

Question 5 is the same as Question 17 (one has an asylum and the other not, meh)

Your Moral Parsimony Score is 47%

(meh, I don't care that much about parsimony, since every situation is different and the same moral code shouldn't be applied in most cases)

Geographical distance-Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

Famili relatedness-Your score of 18% is a lot lower than the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions-Your score of 18% is much lower than the average score of 61% in this category.

Scale-Your score of 100% is significantly higher than the average score of 73% in this category.
#36
80%
distance-100%
family-67%
acts and omissions-100%
scale-51%
"A guitar is the human soul, speaking with just six strings..."- Eddie Lee

Irvine Kinneas of the Final Fantasy Elite - PM me, Ichikurosaki, Gallagher2006, or Deliriumbassist to join!
#37
To me, a few of these questions had certain missing factors that would sway the decision, so I couldn't really answer them 100% to my morals, so, that being said:

I got a 52%
I was an Internet Witness in the mike.h Murder Case.
Quote by Pauldapro
this man is right. everything he says is right. so, stop killing people and get therapy ffs
#38
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 67%
Your score of 67% is not significantly different than the average score of 64%.

Geographical Distance
Your score of 67% is somewhat lower than the average score of 72% in this category.

Family Relatedness

Your score of 51% is not greatly different to the average score of 52% in this category.

Acts and Omissions
Your score of 100% is much higher than the average score of 61% in this category.

Scale
Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 73% in this category.

Dang, I'm kinda average.
Quote by bizkitday4eva
You know suicide is just as bad as killing yourself



Taco Man of the Jhonen Vasquez/Invader Zim Club. PM HolyWars90 to join
#39
Moral Parsimony Score - 35%

Geographical Distance - 51%

Family Relatedness - 18%

Acts and Omissions - 67%

Scale - 3%
Quote by dminishedthingy
It didn't seem possible, but apparently Messiah can spam even more now.


Quote by \Powerslave/
I can see it now. "Dark Thrones and Black People".


Quote by \Powerslave/
I pretty much wank something small and sleek.

ololololololol


JOIN THE NEKROGESTAPO!
#40
Quote by Chris_Parker
To me, a few of these questions had certain missing factors that would sway the decision, so I couldn't really answer them 100% to my morals, so, that being said:

I got a 52%


Well, that means you are less parsimonious (sp?)....
Page 1 of 2