道德标准测试

刚才又是在Zheng那看到的一个关于道德标准的测试，这小子怎么这两天这么多测试？！我也去做了一个。。。跟他的结果差距挺大的。

Taboo - The Results

Results Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.57. Your Interference Factor is: 0.80. Your Universalising Factor is: 0.50. What do these results mean? Are you thinking straight about morality? There was no inconsistency in the way that you responded to the questions in this activity. It is likely that you think that what makes any of these actions morally problematic has to do with God or some other source of morality external to nature, society and human judgement. You indicated that an act can be wrong even if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. There is nothing contradictory then in a claim that the actions depicted in these scenarios are morally problematic. However, there is a tension in your responses in that you indicated that you do see harm in at least some of the activities depicted here. Given that the actions described in these scenarios are private and it was specified as clearly as possible that they didn't involve harm, it isn't clear where you think the harm might lie. More about this below...

下面是对Moralising Quotient, Interference Factor, Universalising Factor的解释。

Your Moralising Quotient is an aggregate measure of your tendency to condemn the actions described in these scenarios as morally wrong. A score of 1.00 indicates a fully moralising position. A score of 0.00 is a fully permissive response. (See below for more on these.)

Your Interference Factor is an aggregate measure of your tendency to judge the actions described here as being the legitimate target of societal interference in the form of prevention or punishment. A score of 1.00 indicates that you think that every act described in these scenarios is subject to societal interference. A score of 0.00 indicates that you think that these acts are essentially a private matter, and that societal interference is inappropriate.

Your Universalising Factor is an aggregate measure of your tendency to judge moral wrongdoing in universal terms. A score of 1.00 means that every time you have determined one of the acts depicted in these scenarios to be morally wrong, you have universalised the judgement of moral wrongoing; that is, you have indicated that the act is wrong regardless of prevailing cultural norms and social conventions. A score of 0.00, on the other hand, means that where you see moral wrong in the acts depicted in these scenarios, you have not once universalised the judgement of moral wrongdoing; that is, you have indicated that whether an act is to be thought of as wrong is largely a matter of social norms, and that it is quite possible that what is wrong in one culture may not be wrong in another. A score of -1 means that you saw no moral wrong in any of the activities depicted in these scenarios, and so it is not possible for this activity to determine the extent to which you see moral wrongdoing in universal terms.

总体来讲我觉得还是比较客观的一个测试，最起码跟我觉得我自己是个什么样的人比较接近。我觉得道德的标准，都是来自于社会群体的的约束，当人们都认为吃屎是一件高尚的事情的时候，那么他就是一件高尚的事情了！

不过，对于一些事情，我还是不能逃避世俗的观点，譬如说测试里有一道题，说一个男的每周都去杂货店买一只鸡，然后回家拿那只鸡手淫完了然后再做了吃（原文是说跟那个鸡做爱，肏，死鸡怎么做爱，奸尸也不太对，所以我觉得说手淫是比较准确的说法），这个我就觉得实在是太恶心了！不过话说回来，换一个角度来想，如果大家都这么做的话，就没有人觉得会是件不好的事情了。

此外还想起来一个例子，就是印度人在表示同意的时候都是点头，这也是因为习惯所养成的。道德也是。套用鲁迅爷爷的一句话：世上本没有路，走的人多了，也就成了路！