What is your F score?

[Frohickey]

What is your F score? (http://www.anesi.com/fscale.htm)

Fifty years ago, the Authoritarian Personality studies attempted to "construct an instrument that would yield an estimate of fascist receptivity at the personality level."

This online, interactive F Scale presents that instrument in its final form. Additional infomation, including an explanation of the personality variables the F Scale tries to measure, is given below after the questionnaire. So take the F Scale now --- and enjoy!

=====

My F score is 3.7.
"You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American."

:D :D :D

[Dros]

2.5 You are a liberal airhead.

More interesting than many personality tests.

[miloblithe]

2.03

I'm a liberal airhead.

Interesting test, although the scoring data is a little old (1950). I'm pretty sure political aditudes have shifted a bit to the left since then in America. I doubt the average would be 3.84 any more. But who knows.

(Not that I'm denying that I'm a left-winger)

[timmyOtool]

3.2 A true American, but just barely :rolleyes:

[wwworry]

stupid test

if (qcount > 0 )
{document.fscale.fscore.value = qsum / qcount;
if ((qsum / qcount) < 2 )
{f.fdesc.value = "You are a whining rotter."}
else
if ( (qsum / qcount) >= 2 && (qsum / qcount) < 3 )
{f.fdesc.value = "You are a liberal airhead."}
else
if ( (qsum / qcount) >= 3 && (qsum / qcount) < 4.5 )
{f.fdesc.value = "You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American."}
else
if ( (qsum / qcount) >= 4.5 && (qsum / qcount) < 5.5 )
{f.fdesc.value = "You should practice doing things with your left hand."}
else
{f.fdesc.value = "Have trouble keeping the lint off your black shirts?"};
}
else {document.fscale.fscore.value = "N/A" }

[takao]

2.3 a liberal airhead
and i wasn't surprised by the result

[trebblekicked]

1.5 You are a whining rotter.

classy :rolleyes:

[zimv20]

2

assuming this test is historically genuine, who was it who attached the subjective labels?

[Neserk]

:eek: 1.9 Whining Rotter??? What is that?

[3rdpath]

1.9 also...but i prefer whinging git to whining rotter.... ;)

[macka]

3.9
You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Lol. I ain't American. :p

[diamond geezer]

2.8

But I think the guy who decided on the scoring is a jerk.

[miloblithe]

2.8

But I think the guy who decided on the scoring is a jerk.

Or perhaps . . . a fascist. :)

[Krizoitz]

3.066666666666666666666666666666666

True American, disciplined and tolerant.

Intriguing

[blue&whiteman]

i'm a buddhist from canada and got: 3.4 You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

[Neserk]

1.9 also...but i prefer whinging git to whining rotter.... ;)


So what is a whining rotter? I understand the whining part..

[blue&whiteman]

So what is a whining rotter? I understand the whining part..

I take rotter to mean sloth-like.

[Neserk]

I take rotter to mean sloth-like.


thanks... I can accept the whining part but not the rotter ;)

[pseudobrit]

I got a 2.83. But there were a few that were worded as such that I had to choose "6" and none that were worded strongly enough to make me choose "1", so I ended up hitting "2" for most answers (edit: oh, the "homosexual" question was the only one I clicked on "1" for).

Does this mean I'm more or less accepting of a fascist government that someone who scores, say, a 3.7? ;)

[IJ Reilly]

What an antique. I'm surprised this test didn't include any questions about velocipedes.

It should be noted here that that the authors concluded that it had "still to be demonstrated" if the F-scale actually did, in fact, measure fascist receptivity at a personality level. They were sure it measured something --- but not exactly sure what. T. W. Adorno returned to the University of Frankfurt, where he amused himself as a principal figure in the Frankfurt school of "critical theory", producing a Freudian-Marxist melange of pseudo-scientific speculative foolishness that is now, thank God, thoroughly discredited.

[amnesiac1984]

What a load of rubbish.

The questions are pretty similar to that political compass that was posted a while back. They are all good questions that would great for sparking debate, but unless your political views are pretty simplistic it pretty hard to give a definitive answer within the set limits. For example, here is what I thought to myself while answering the questions:

5] Science has its place, but there are many important things that can never be understood by the human mind.


While the first few questions were pretty simple to answer this one seems almost paradoxical. I find it hard to hold a viewpoint on this one as there isn't really any logical basis for one that I can see. If there are things too great for us to understand, how will we ever know? And how do we know that someone won't eventually be able to explain everything, I guess we'll probably only know the answer to this question when
a) we actually have found and understood everything there is to be understood
or
b) the world ends and we've run out of time.

[14] There is hardly anything lower than a person who does not feel a great love, gratitude, and respect for his parents.


This is a good example of how with these tests your score can change depending on how long you think about the question and also it leave you wanting to ask another question. Initially I agreed, then I realised that this isn't realistic, just because I do, doesn't mean everybody should, I mean, some people parents are complete bastards who make their life a misery and don't deserve an ounce of respect. In this case the person would be better off realising that and attempting to seek a good role model elsewhere.

[15] Most of our social problems would be solved if we could somehow get rid of the immoral, crooked, and feebleminded people.

Same with this question, it seems like a good idea at first but how are you going to decide who is immoral, morality is subjective so thats out of the window. Feebleminded people are feebleminded for a reason and perhaps the reason should be tackled first.

20] People can be divided into two distinct classes: the weak and the strong.


Yes could be true, but thats not a valid issue IMO, the issue here is whether people can be changed from a weak class to a strong class, and I think they can.

[21] Some day it will probably be shown that astrology can explain a lot of things.


This question really got my goat. It lists this question under the stereotypy and superstition category, unfortunately they have chosen one specific example to illustrate it, If I answered this question truthfully it might give the impression that I don't give much time to mystical and spiritual shenanigans, but this would be an inaccurate picture, I'm not that person at all, I just don't believe in astrology specifically.


[22] Wars and social troubles may someday be ended by an earthquake or flood that will destroy the whole world.


This question seems a bit strange, surely if war and social trouble could be ended by an earthquake then so could peace and social harmony. This question should have said 'The world and all the people on it will someday be destroyed an earthquake or flood." I guess they put the war and social trouble in to relate it to the noah's ark story (arghanoah) adn keep the fundamentalist christians happy.

27] Familiarity breeds contempt.

To be honest I don't really know what this means! :confused:


anyway, my score was 2.76 recurring, guess i'm a liberal airhead then.

I think my point is that they these types of questionaires help do nothing but perpatuate the simplification of political issues. No question should ever be answered in such a multiple choice way, except maybe simple addition questions.

think maybe its time for another politcal compass round up (http://www.politicalcompass.org) it's more up to date and actually useful, although I have the same gripe with those questions, at least the reuslts are given in a more neutral way.

[IJ Reilly]

This "test" reminds me of the general knowledge quiz that was posted here a few months back that rated all Americans as idiots, no matter how many questions they answered correctly, and Europeans as smart and cultured no matter how little they knew.

The curious thing about this test is that most if not all of the low-numbered answers are clearly indications of anti-authoritarian attitudes, but answering in that way results in an insulting personality profile. A person with greater respect for outside authority (and presumably more likely to be attracted to authoritarian forms of government, e.g., fascism) is rated by this test as a "true American." So what is the real message here?

[Frohickey]

I think you misread the scoring and what its trying to gauge. Either extreme is bad, because a totalitarian could be at both ends of the range.

[Geetar]

This "test" reminds me of the general knowledge quiz that was posted here a few months back that rated all Americans as idiots, no matter how many questions they answered correctly, and Europeans as smart and cultured no matter how little they knew.


I'm a European. I know very little, but I do know that I'm smart and cultured ;)

By the way, I scored 3 on the test, which I'm informed now makes me an American :confused:

[IJ Reilly]

I think you misread the scoring and what its trying to gauge. Either extreme is bad, because a totalitarian could be at both ends of the range.

This explanation makes about as much sense as the test itself.

[Neserk]

What a load of rubbish.


Well, of course! It is a silly test. I doubt it was even standardized... I assumed we all knew it was a huge joke. No?




To be honest I don't really know what this means! :confused:


Familiarity breeds contempt? That just means that the more time you spend with people the less you like them. I believe studies have indicated that this is generally untrue.

[amnesiac1984]

=Neserk
Familiarity breeds contempt? That just means that the more time you spend with people the less you like them. I believe studies have indicated that this is generally untrue.

Well thanks for that, I know I've heard it a lot before, it seems so simple now. And I reckon it generally does. :P

[Frohickey]

Familiarity breeds contempt? That just means that the more time you spend with people the less you like them. I believe studies have indicated that this is generally untrue.

The statement is general enough that depending on the circumstances it could be true or false.

The quote "Familiarity breeds contempt" is one. I've heard it said about police officers that end up having a negligent discharge of their duty firearm. Sometimes it is harmless, sometimes its tragic. But in this context, their familiarity with their duty firearms makes them unmindful of the consequences if they are unsafe with it. There are lots of cases like above that apply to the statement. Be it having a few drinks before driving, cutting lots of items with a boxcutter and getting your finger eventually, etc.

[wordmunger]

2.16--liberal airhead.

So for those of you who have implied that I'm some kind of heartless Nazi (see this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=63984)), we have more in common than you think :)

[poopyhead]

2.966
almost an american

[G5orbust]

3.466666666666667

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Glad to see Im a true American...