How machiavellian are you?

[loreta]

45!

 

[Tristan]

My score was 63

 

[Ca.]

Your score was 50 of 100.

This puts you in the category of the low Machs, people who will hold out for the goodness of the world and avoid manipulation. Not the people Machiavelli would approve of.

Hmmmm, I guess i am in the middle of the road............. Keep on working on the work...........

Hmmmmm 2: The graph looks like a camels back.

 

[Peam]

50

 

[Laura]

Mine:

Your score was 53 of 100.

This puts you in the category of the low Machs, people who will hold out for the goodness of the world and avoid manipulation. Not the people Machiavelli would approve of.

 

[Beau]

I scored a 55, in the low Mach category. I don't think I agreed with any statement given...

 

[Wu Wei Wu]

I scored a 55, in the low Mach category. I don't think I agreed with any statement given...

I agree with you there, it was hard to be . . . flexible. Seems I scored the lowest: Your score was 36 of 100.

Machiavelli wouldn't have liked me. Ah well. In an odd synchronicty, a friend and I were talking about psychopathy, as we both run blogs that discuss the subject. We both took the following test: http://personality-testing.info/tests/DT.php

Its on the same site, but it covers all the dark triad categories, Narcissm, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. He scored quite high, whereas I scored as follows:
Narcissism: 0.7
Machiavellianism: 0.9
Psychopathy: 1.3

Has anyone else done this test?

 

[Andromeda]

40 of 100

"This puts you in the category of the low Machs, people who will hold out for the goodness of the world and avoid manipulation. Not the people Machiavelli would approve of."

 

[Laura]

Machiavelli wouldn't have liked me. Ah well. In an odd synchronicty, a friend and I were talking about psychopathy, as we both run blogs that discuss the subject. We both took the following test: http://personality-testing.info/tests/DT.php

Its on the same site, but it covers all the dark triad categories, Narcissm, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. He scored quite high, whereas I scored as follows:
Narcissism: 0.7
Machiavellianism: 0.9
Psychopathy: 1.3

Has anyone else done this test?

Just did.

Narcissism 0.9
Machiavellianism 1.1
Psychopathy 0.3

 

[Keit]

Narcissism 1
Machiavellianism 1.6
Psychopathy 0.2

 

[pete02]

Me too,

Narcissism: 1.3
Machiavellianism: 1.5
Psychopathy: 1

 

[Zadius Sky]

Did the second test:

Narcissism = 0.4
Machiavellianism = 0.8
Psychopathy = 0.4

 

[l apprenti de forgeron]

53 out of 100.

53 too.

Mine is 60 of 100.

Your score was 60 of 100.

This puts you in the category of the low Machs, people who will hold out for the goodness of the world and avoid manipulation. Not the people Machiavelli would approve of.

I also think that there are some statements there that can be seen as Machiavellian, but are acceptable within strategic enclosure or external consideration. It's the intent that counts. Environment that a person currently is part of also plays a big role.

I agree. And leaving aside the morals that emerge and are specific to the goal in the "work", I should say we need to have other perspectives on certain morals or values ​​and their sources. If you do not believe any more in a god that gives us rules of thinking, feeling and behaving, is a very important thing. In the everyday life of people is still very mixed monotheistic religions values ​​with other values ​​perhaps drawn from scientific data (and would have to feed this last process, especially to psychology to recognize those who have no empathy) or moral drawn from the permitted/prohibited legal or normal/abnormal psychiatric. In my case it would have reread Nietzsche on the birth of certain values ​​but in light of what we now know about psychopaths now. Or to Foucault, for example, when describing the moral of the ancient Greeks and Romans, not to be recognized or saved for any god, but was to leave a good memory, and "instructions" on how to live a beautiful and worthy human life. Or where speaking of the Stoics, and some morals that are chosen by own will to govern itself (and to govern well the others). Obviously it would be foolish to want to build a new table of morals​​ for all (but as art would be fun do some tables!) and would go against the free will of others. But I think that as science get rid of weight from pathological and closed materialism, may be the true basis of conscience, values ​​and life choices more objectively and light for people.

 

[Nienna]

Narcissism 1.1

Machiavellianism 1.3

Psychopathy 0.5

 

[l apprenti de forgeron]

Narcissism 2.1

Machiavellianism 0.7

Psychopathy 0.5

Mmm albeit quite subjective it helps to think. Thanks for the test.