Tweet
That's not luck. Luck is purely by chance. "Some people are naturally lucky" is internally contradictory.
-
-
Economic freedom runs central to democracy, and personal freedom. You are representing a bloc that died in 1991. Good luck to you. I only care about one axis at this point and it is economic left/right. If you are on the economic left, it counters your social views.Originally posted by Provost Harrison
No, as is quite visibly demonstrated by me and the other lefties here, we are most certainly not Stalinists, if you even know what the word means. If we were, we'd all be in the upper left quadrant.
So how does your 'economic freedom' give freedom and democracy that does not run counter to your more authoritarian standpoints. And lets face it, you've only moved that little bit more liberal because of coming to terms with your sexuality...join the dots buddy...
I'm not authoritarian anything. Name it. I'm pro-right to bear arms
, neutral on abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-evolution, pro-secular...
My sexuality had nothing to do with it.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
It's a theory that attempts to explain the behavior of certain parts of the universe. It fails horribly. It is, however, a scientific theory.
Not every theory that attempts to do so is a scientific one.Comment
-
Of course it is. It's wrong, it has no evidence to support it, but it's a scientific theory. It could, in principle, be true.Comment
-
Then why is your social score higher than most people here? I'm willing to bet you disagreed with the "Should marijuana be legalized" question, for starters. Of course, in your rediculous world view, that wouldn't be an issue of authoritarianism, right?Originally posted by Giancarlo
Economic freedom runs central to democracy, and personal freedom. You are representing a bloc that died in 1991. Good luck to you. I only care about one axis at this point and it is economic left/right. If you are on the economic left, it counters your social views.
I'm not authoritarian anything. Name it. I'm pro-right to bear arms, neutral on abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-evolution, pro-secular...
My sexuality had nothing to do with it."The French caused the war [Persian Gulf war, 1991]" - Ned
"you people who bash Bush have no appreciation for one of the great presidents in our history." - Ned
"I wish I had gay sex in the boy scouts" - DissidentComment
-
Hahah, oh I forgot about marijuana. The guy I'm dating used to use it, so I lightened my views on it. He convinced me (no I didn't smoke any) that I shouldn't have such harsh views on it. He doesn't use anymore and hasn't in a long time (he only smoked it three times, said it wasn't his thing).Originally posted by Kontiki
Then why is your social score higher than most people here? I'm willing to bet you disagreed with the "Should marijuana be legalized" question, for starters. Of course, in your rediculous world view, that wouldn't be an issue of authoritarianism, right?
So nice try.
My world view is practical. I'm pragmatic.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Religion also tries to explain how certain parts of our universe work. Does that make it a scientific theory? ( Again, let's leave the bull**** part alone here )Comment
-
Scientific theories require the ability to make statistically significant predictions to be considered scientific.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Of course it is. It's wrong, it has no evidence to support it, but it's a scientific theory. It could, in principle, be true.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
Yes. Christianity, or Islam, or whatever, could in principle be true.Originally posted by Azazel
Religion also tries to explain how certain parts of our universe work. Does that make it a scientific theory? ( Again, let's leave the bull**** part alone here )Comment
-
And again, the answer will not be a "well duh" for everybody. Many oppressive parents cannot understand that their children have secrets. They think they are entitled to know everything of their child, because they micro-manage them. Such an oppression hints at an authoritarian streak, which may or may not be confirmed by other answers.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
It's not a question if children should be able to keep secrets. It's a question if children keeping secrets from their parents is a natural occurance. This can be confirmed easily through simple observation.
But thinking that abstract art isn't "art" doesn't mean you want it suppressed, or even care. I don't think rap is music; I think it's crap. It doesn't make me totalitarian.
Not a totalitarian, but it does make you more absolutist in judgement that if you said "it's an art form like any other". For the matter, I also think that rap is crap (although I acknowledge it as a form of music), and it participates to my well-noted authoritarianism in cultural matters.
And yet you can't give your REASON for the reply. The questions don't indicate your ideology! Opposite ideologies can have equally good reasons for a particular answer to many of the questions.
This is the inherent flaw of all quantitative polls. You have to give standardised replies which often don't mirror your views with any precision. There are two ways to "solve" the problem: the first one is to have a qualitative poll (an actual solution), where the respondent can elaborate as much as he wishes. The only problem is that it takes hours to derive something from each individual response - i.e, you couldn't have taken the test if it had been qualitiative, because politicalcompass.org doesn't have an army of political scientists working 24/7 to analyse you.
The second "solution" (which is much worse, at the exception that it is realistic) is to have enough questions to compile an overall tendency, making the error occuring in one question must less dramatic. And if you happen by "mistake" to reply significantly more authoritarian on many questions, maybe that's because you are indeed less liberal than others, rather than because you are really having a streak of bad luck / insufficiently precise questions.
I admit the questionnaire is far from perfect, as it is way too short to be really solid. The considerations about religion are extremely short, for example. But that's the nature of Internet polls: you won't have any replies if they are too long or tedious. In this regard, the other poll (the one linked by Odin) is much better, and much more complex, but it is also much more tedious (80 questions
)
"I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
"I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
"I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- DisComment
-
Good ones, or correct ones.Originally posted by Dauphin
Scientific theories require the ability to make statistically significant predictions.
Anyway, the point is that whether or not astrology is true is a purely empirical question that has nothing to do with ideology.Comment
-
Nice try about what? How did you answer that question? Maximizing freedom dictates that you would strongly agree."The French caused the war [Persian Gulf war, 1991]" - Ned
"you people who bash Bush have no appreciation for one of the great presidents in our history." - Ned
"I wish I had gay sex in the boy scouts" - DissidentComment
-
I don't care if someone uses marijuana or not. It isn't my issue as I don't use it. If you use, I could care less.Originally posted by Kontiki
Nice try about what? How did you answer that question? Maximizing freedom dictates that you would strongly agree.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Same difference when discussing statistics. If it makes no statistically significant predictions then its not correct or good, and not scientific.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Good ones, or correct ones.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
Why can't you just answer the question? What was your response to "Marijuana should be legalized"?"The French caused the war [Persian Gulf war, 1991]" - Ned
"you people who bash Bush have no appreciation for one of the great presidents in our history." - Ned
"I wish I had gay sex in the boy scouts" - DissidentComment
Comment