The Authoritarian Test

[jhonny]

Mine is 86

 

[ana]

...there are some questions above wich imply following authorities like 5/16/17 and 19 osit, and if you strongly disagree you get a higher score

Shouldn't. Notice that on page 19 the instruction reads: Your answers to Items 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19 and 22 are scored the same way (meaning the same way as you scored number 3). In the scoring portion, the instruction for number three says "If you wrote down a “-4” that’s scored as a 1."

Does that help?

Oh I didn't get it :P, then the result for me is 44

 

[Mountain Crown]

I scored 45

My higher scores included:

10. Our country will be destroyed someday if we do not smash the perversions eating away at our moral fiber and traditional beliefs.

I moderately agreed thinking of psychopaths as eating away at morality itself.

12. The “old-fashioned ways” and the “old-fashioned values” still show the best way to live.

Slight agreement not to throw out the baby with the bath water, plus I was thinking that normal instictive morality had to be a factor in the development of tradition, not just authoritarian institutions.

17. There are many radical, immoral people in our country today, who are trying to ruin it for their own godless purposes, whom the authorities should put out of action.

Slight agreement thinking of psychopaths.

 

[Laura]

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.

Same for me. As we have discovered from studying pathology, the very idea of "your truth/my truth" is part of the post-modernist relativism and can be traced to being directly implicated in the chaos of today. Remembering what Gurdjieff said about true esotericism:

"The inner circle is called the 'esoteric'; this circle consists of people who have attained the highest development possible for man, each one of whom possesses individuality in the fullest degree, that is to say, an indivisible 'I,' all forms of consciousness possible for man, full control over these states of consciousness, the whole of knowledge possible for man, and a free and independent will. They cannot perform actions opposed to their understanding or have an understanding which is not expressed by actions. At the same time there can be no discords among them, no differences of understanding. Therefore their activity is entirely co-ordinated and leads to one common aim without any kind of compulsion because it is based upon a common and identical understanding.

That pretty much seems to describe the Paleolithic Earth-honoring culture that was stable and peaceful for many thousands of years.

What is interesting is that nowadays, things have been so mixed up that a group of people who DO have "no differences in understanding" because they have done the work on themselves, the research, shared their data, etc, are called a "mind-controlled (read: "authoritarian") CULT when nothing could be further from the truth. Consider what Nachman ben Yehuda wrote:

by Nachman Ben-Yehuda, the Israeli sociologist:

"How do we perceive our culture? How do we understand ourselves as beings in need of meaning? We are socialized into and live in complex cultures from which we extract the very essence of our identity, but at the same time, we also construct these cultures. How is this process accomplished? What is the nature of those cultural processes...?

"One interesting way of exploring cultures is to examine some of the myriad contrasts that characteristically make up cultures. These contrasts set boundaries, which in turn define the variety of the symbolic-moral universes of which complex cultures are made. In turn, these symbolic-moral universes give rise to and support both personal and collective identities. There are many such contrasts, some more profound than others. There are physical contrasts, such as black/white, day/night, sea/land, mountain/valley; and there are socially and morally constructed contrasts, such as good/bad, right/wrong, justice/injustice, trust/betrayal. The contrast we shall focus on in this book is a major and significant one: that between truth and falsehood. This contrast cuts across many symbolic-moral universes because it touches a quality to which we attach central importance - that between the genuine and the spurious. ...

"[T]he demarcating line between that which is truth and that which is not did not leap into existence overnight, but developed gradually in Western philosophical thought over many years. Issues of truth and falsehood have occupied the minds of {many} eminent scholars...

"Until the tempestuous and confusing age of postmodernism was unleashed upon us, the demarcation between truth and falsehood could be established with little difficulty. Postmodernist analysts emphasize ... the concept that no boundaries exist between "real" and "unreal" because all narratives are different but equally "real" versions of reality, no one better than any other. ... Such a view makes many of the contrasts {just mentioned} irrelevant. ...

"I agree that a major characteristic of cultures is the existence of a great many versions of reality and numerous narratives. In fact, I believe that the more we have, the merrier, because then the professional challenge for {those} examining these cultures is genuinely more demanding. However, I cannot possibly accept the claim that all these versions or narratives are equal; they are not, either morally or, much more importantly, empirically. Putting the Nazi version of reality on the same level with those of Albert Schweitzer, Martin Luther King Jr, etc is to me empirically false and morally impossible although I do concede that morality is a contestable and negotiable variable.

"As scientists we must affirm that there are versions of reality which are inconsistent with, even contradictory to, "facts." The realities which these false versions create are synthetic and misleading. ...

"Taking different versions of reality as they are, without contrasting them and trying to find out which one is closer to the observable and known facts, will leave us in a haze of eternal uncertainties, a shadowy "reality" where nothing is true or false.

"Adhering to social realities which are based on incorrect empirical facts and false information is - evidently - possible, but carries a heavy price tag in terms of a genuine understanding of the world in which we live." ( Sacrificing Truth: Archaeology and the Myth of Masada)

Ernest Gellman also discusses this problem and I covered some of his findings and views here:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/227222-The-Golden-Age-Psychopathy-and-the-Sixth-Extinction

Any of you who have NOT read this article ought to do so, please.

As Gurdjieff pointed out, if an esoteric group does not form a nucleus for change in our world, our ray of creation may just become extinct.

 

[seek10]

I got 66. questions are mostly from different ends of the spectrum. God, feminism, sex , who to follow who. All so called seculars may score the similar range. Meaning of these word like God's Law could vary widely and confusing - this reminded george carlin's joke on My God or Your God. ;)

 

[Joe]

Well, every country needs a strong determined leader.

LOL, I'm just the opposite... I don't think we need a "leader" at a national level at all, good, bad or in between.

I agree, Guardian. Things won't be better until the ideas of "leader" and "country" are both meaningless. But that's probably why you and I got some of the lowest scores!

The problem with this test is that the score depends on a person's perspective and knowledge about what is really going on (in the US for example). Two very different people could both answer with a +4 to this one for example:

"Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us".

What are these "radical new ways"? They could be the march to totalitarianism or the destruction of 'religious and family values'.

Sure, Altemayer would say that anyone who gets a +4 is an authoritarian follower regardless of their motive or perspective because they put their faith in a 'mighty leader', but that's not necessarily true, because I might be thinking that the world is so screwed up that the only way to save it as a functioning 3D planet for 3D humans IS to have an all powerful leader who would reset the clock and usher in a more humane and sane way of life. The thing is, I wouldn't 'follow' him or her or their every word, but if he or she did this, I would agree with it, because I know that a few of us trying to do it on our own isn't going to change the world for everyone. Then of course there is the question of whether or not this world SHOULD be changed, and whether or not it is 'perfect' as it is, for the majority of the people on the planet and their level of being.

I got 44 btw.

 

[Echo Blue]

My score was a 53.

 

[Nienna]

I scored 56. I couldn't help but read psychopathy/pathology into a lot of what would happen if things were done as a "free" lifestyle.

Psychopaths would rise right back up to the top and start controlling things again.

Giving free rein to sexual preferences would, in my own way of thinking, legitimize rape, pedophilia, etc. Same with some of the other questions.

 

[Don Diego]

honestly63

 

[Mrs. Peel]

The problem with this test is that the score depends on a person's perspective and knowledge about what is really going on (in the US for example). Two very different people could both answer with a +4 to this one for example:

That is the problem. I found myself asking, well, what do they consider traditional morals and values? It all depends on what you know to be really true. So I would say it's really hard to answer all this with out more "data" included in the questions.

I got a 35.

 

[go2]

I scored a 74 with 24 points from questions 10, 12, and 17. I took Dr. Bob's authoritarian test when I read the book years ago and got a much lower score when the center of gravity was "wine, women, and song". :)

 

[Guardian]

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'.

How? I don't understand. The truth is the truth, and a lie is a lie...something either happened or it didn't. That doesn't change regardless of how you want to live, who you want to worship, or make woopie with?

 

[Guardian]

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.

I'm just not seeing what personal choices regarding "lifestyle, religious beliefs, and sexual preferences" have to do with what is, or is not, the truth? How'd they even get in the same bucket? The truth doesn't change depending on what we want to do with our meat suits?

I am a female who is about to turn 50. That is the truth. If I decided to move to the big city tomorrow, worship Yoda and have sex with a hologram, I would still be a female who is about to turn 50. Truth doesn't change in accordance with what we want to do with our lives?

 

[Aneke]

My score was 45.

 

[Adaryn]

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'.

How? I don't understand. The truth is the truth, and a lie is a lie...something either happened or it didn't. That doesn't change regardless of how you want to live, who you want to worship, or make woopie with?

Well, what if your belief/worship system is based on lies?