The Authoritarian Test
- Thread starter Laura
- Start date
Roland J. Prather
Jedi
I scored 49 the first time and 84 the second time. The second time I had taken the test i read a few of the post here. Now what’s interesting is that it seems as though the test is not testing on how you interpret the questions but the state of your mind at the time you take it. If you strongly believe in your own interpretation of the question whether left or right you have an authoritarian mind set and therefore it shows in the score rather than the interpretation of the question; which is misleading in a way because the test have you focus on the meaning or interpretation of the question.
Also this test could very well be for people who are not educated on the unseen reality of this world; such as OPs and psychopaths. When I had taken the test the first time I was interpreting the question heavy one way +4 or heavy the other way -4, therefore my score was low. After reading some of the post and then going back to take the test again my mind was more open to the test itself.
I considered more and became more neutral to the test and thus scored higher “84”. So it seems the test is checking the personality rather than the knowledge of a person. I got hung up on knowledge the first time and "what is what"? Confusing to say the least.
I've taken many test from corporate, schools, psychology test, jobs, personality test merely for fun and what I notice is that tests are usually geared towards what they(whomever the creator of a given test) interpret as such. For example Like 2 years back I had taken a corporate test twice the first time taken it I was very honest yet I failed by their standards. This resulted in me realizing that corporate wanted to recruit people of a lower standard or people who could easily hang-up their right and wrong if they had any, people who went along to get along ( Authoritarian personalities).
So I went back and manage to get in a second time to test this theory and had taken the test again.
This time I decided to lie and as a result I was told that I had supervisor qualities. 
I was surprised to say the least. But the fun was over at my second interview as I suspected they quickly realized that I did this, and I was out the door. 
lol I chuckle to this :P
Anyway very rarely do you come across a test that is more objective in the questioning and such test either have a person who can explain to you your arising questions of the question presented. Or such test absent of an administrator has many parts to it and many more questions that dig deep into your mind.
So a grain of salt with this one..
Also this test could very well be for people who are not educated on the unseen reality of this world; such as OPs and psychopaths. When I had taken the test the first time I was interpreting the question heavy one way +4 or heavy the other way -4, therefore my score was low. After reading some of the post and then going back to take the test again my mind was more open to the test itself.
I considered more and became more neutral to the test and thus scored higher “84”. So it seems the test is checking the personality rather than the knowledge of a person. I got hung up on knowledge the first time and "what is what"? Confusing to say the least.
I've taken many test from corporate, schools, psychology test, jobs, personality test merely for fun and what I notice is that tests are usually geared towards what they(whomever the creator of a given test) interpret as such. For example Like 2 years back I had taken a corporate test twice the first time taken it I was very honest yet I failed by their standards. This resulted in me realizing that corporate wanted to recruit people of a lower standard or people who could easily hang-up their right and wrong if they had any, people who went along to get along ( Authoritarian personalities).
So I went back and manage to get in a second time to test this theory and had taken the test again.
This time I decided to lie and as a result I was told that I had supervisor qualities. I was surprised to say the least. But the fun was over at my second interview as I suspected they quickly realized that I did this, and I was out the door. lol I chuckle to this :P Anyway very rarely do you come across a test that is more objective in the questioning and such test either have a person who can explain to you your arising questions of the question presented. Or such test absent of an administrator has many parts to it and many more questions that dig deep into your mind.
So a grain of salt with this one..
Buddy
The Living Force
Guardian said:
Agreed. Thanks for saying that. As a pre-Work anti-authoritarian, the back of my mind has always held the belief that if authoritarian 'leaders' were to disappear overnight, the resulting change in life circumstances would shock a lot of people out of their states of complacency and dependence. Everything would start changing. If this shock were to create a higher state of consciousness in the 'normal' person, it might even last (for awhile at least?)
Mark Twain is observed to have said once (paraphrasing):
"If government/law were to disappear overnight, good people would still do what good people do and bad people would still do what bad people do."
A bit simplistic perhaps, but the essence is there, I think.
pete02
The Living Force
Scored a 93 but its certainly not because I'm that much of an authoritarian. I think I should've taken more time reading and thinking about the questions. Then again it could be programming from mommy and daddy (definite authoritarians) but I didn't really think I agreed much with that way of thinking anymore.
knowledge_of_self
The Living Force
curious_richard said:
I got a 59, and that's pretty much how I saw it too Richard.
Pete said:
Well ahem, I scored pretty high too: 106! But I really just interpreted the questions in my own way.
And Laura, I'll definitely check out the Odyssey thread.
Edit:
For example, I didn't really agree with this:
Everyone should have their own lifestyle, religious beliefs, and sexual preferences, even if it makes them different from everyone else.
As it reminded me of everyone having their own 'truth'. That's not really gonna work. If a group of people has the same kind of knowledge (there being only one objective truth), and the same kind of 'lifestyle' (which I interpreted as 'way of living'), it's much more stable. Of course sexual preferences, to some extent, would be different and other certain personal characteristics, hobbies and stuff.
