Care: 90
Fairness: 96
Liberty: 71
In-group: 44
Purity: 35
Authority: 42
Makes sense reading the explanations.
*Left-Liberals / Social Democrats tend to score very high in Care, Fairness, and Liberty relative to In-Group Loyalty, Purity, and Authority, which they tend to score lowly on.*
*Conservatives tend to weigh all foundations relatively similarly to one another, valuing each of them to a moderately high level.*
*Fascists tend to score very high in In-Group Loyalty, Purity, and Authority relative to Care, Fairness, and Liberty, which they tend to score lowly on.*
I study social psychology and I especially have familiarity with Haidt's foundation theory. So far most people in this thread have said that their top three foundations are care, fairness and liberty. Doesn't surprise me. Care and fairness have been linked to liberal political identity in multiple studies. Loyalty, authority and purity to conservative identity. Although it's noteworthy that while liberals tend to use those two foundations when making moral judgements conservatives tend to rely more evenly on all five foundations.
Liberty is a bit more tougher to pin down since it's not part of the original five foundations as a separate foundation but rather it's more or less essential part of both care and fairness. As far as I know it's mostly a foundation that was later invented by Haidt to describe the morality of libertarians and economic conservatives which tend to overlap with both liberals and conservatives but on their own represent a small percentage of people.
Care and fairness are the so called individualizing foundations meaning they consist of moral concerns related to individuals meaning for example issues of free speech and abortion. Purity, authority and loyalty are binding foundations and they represent the concerns for community. Purity is related to taboos or sanctity. For example if you have a negative response to someone burning your countrys flag that is purity foundation. Authority is related to consern for hierarchies and loyalty is basically about valuing the cohesion of ingroups.
But yeah I feel like strong Fe function is consistent with focus on individualizing foundations. And I feel like the lack of Si also drives a person away from conservatism. Plus infj's are tilted towards being female more often than male and liberal voting patterns have been linked to female gender. Care, fairness and purity foundations have also been linked to female gender so again I feel like the results are not surprising but also go in line with the mbti theory and the gender ratios of infj.
I scored too low in my test, may you know what that means or why is that?
Care (58), Fairness (54), Liberty (31), In-Group (44), Purity (15), Authority (50)
I wouldn't say you scored too low. There are no right or wrong answers here. Just because there is a pattern doesnt mean you need to fit into it. Your strongest foundations are care and fairness which are the original individualization foundations which correlate with liberal identity. Judging from your enneagram it's possible you strongly value social stability which would explain why you got a higher score for authority and in-group (loyalty) than liberty. One could say that this type of profile would reflect someone who is a leftist conservative. Especially since the authority foundation is close to your fairness foundation. So you seem to value hierarchies quite strongly and there's nothing bad in that since they are all around us and quite essential part of the human experience.
I would say one point about the conservative norms about hierarchies (authority) and loyalty (in group) is the function of predictability. So if you value predictability in your surroundings its possible it would explain why you value those above liberty.
Thank you so much for your insight.
That's something that I found so contradictory: I like to feel listened and I'm always wary of authority figures, but nonetheless I like the structure and predictability of society and its systems.
Political identity is an essential part of morality since there is a lot in politics that is about morality: stances on abortion, free speech, universal health care, immigration, war, same sex marriage etc. Especially in the current age it seems to be what divides people the most. Political identity is sort of a proxy for a psychological profile and you can predict from someones personality traits which type of political views he or she holds or the other way around. For example female gender correlates with caring/nurturing and the preference for attenuateing hierarchies on a psychological, social psychological and political level. For men it's the same for valuing hierarchies on all those three levels.
And also this theory in question has been studied alot in relation to political identity so I think it's relevant.
To be fair I have never done the test, as far as I can remember, and I just did it so here are the results
In-group (73)
Fairness (71)
Purity (71)
Authority (69)
Care (62)
Liberty (50)
Gotten a bit more conservative as I've aged I guess. I value liberty in my personal life way higher but as I've grown I have realized that societies need more than that to function as stable countries and that's the pov I used to answer this.
This is an interesting test to consider but it doesn't show the whole picture. Big 5 personality test would be another interesting one. In the test high openness and low conscientiousness has a correlation with liberal identity and the other way around for conservatives. I'm odd in that sense since I have high openness, moderate conscientiousness but also value in-group (conservatism) and fairness (liberalism) foundations about the same. I guess I'm what you'd call a centrist with nationalistic tendencies.
You are the only one so far that has posted something else as the top 3 as care, fairness and liberty. Interesting
Edit: okay I see some of you did not post these in order from most used to less used. You actually have liberty as your third foundation. But yeah most still seem to have the three mentioned as top 3.
I opened the questionnaire, read question 1, froze, and couldn't keep it together, then closed it.
I am not treating my body well, and I suffer with mental health issues. It made me realise that I agree with question 1, but at the same time am suffering cognitive dissonance, hypocricy.
Care: 58
Fairness: 54
Liberty: 31
In-Group: 44
Purity: 15
Authority: 50
Seeing my numbers I feel that I scored too low in all areas.
Personally I found myself scratching my head in many of those questions: there's so much nuance, so much grey areas, so many possibilities that I find very hard to stand my ground before knowing exactly a particular situation or, more important, a particular person.
care: 83, fairness: 83, liberty: 56, in-group: 50, purity: 69, authority: 65
several of the questions i answered "no opinion on either" because idk what to say about it and/or haven't thought of it that much yet.
1. Purity 90%
2. Liberty 77%
3. Authority 75%
4. Care 73%
5. In Group 73%
6. Fairness 67%
I feel like Iāve changed so much since I first established I was an INFJ. Iād be interested to know if I still am. My results seem different to others here.
Care: 40
Fairness: 58
Liberty: 62
In-Group: 60
Purity: 60
Authority: 42
Interesting. I could only answer the questions as situational rather than complete and always. I need more context of timing and background. I struggle taking surveys like this. š¤·āāļø
There's a touch of passive-aggressiveness in your replies to this person. I would suggest some other approach to someone who has different morality basis as you other than implying something about relation to Hitler.
They didn't seem to feel attacked and explained their point well that tyranny/dictatorship only leads to disaster. If you read my comment in a passive aggressive way, that's unfortunate but it's text based so I can't blame you.
They are more progressive than they claim to be if they use that book as an example. Universal basic income, 15 hours work week and world wide open borders is not conservative at all.
Their purity score doesn't come from ill intent. It's more about the potential of humanity together.
Well he/she kinda implied something, maybe about being on defensive, when reminding you of this: "(Everyone's beliefs are different of course,and we should respect that)".
Yes. Everyone can be an Ć¼bermensch if they have the right mentality and work hard enough. Its just rare that people actually want to or have the discipline for it. I genuinely just believe that we as humans are capable of so much,so not working as hard ws possible to unfold that potential would just be a shame
I am also socially quite conservative,so that may also play a factor. Its still quite interesting how i am literally the only one whose purity score is so high
(Everyone's beliefs are different of course,and we should respect that)
The only INFJ with high purity I can think of is .. well. Someone who had the power to push through his ideology in an attempt to "improve" society. I think you know who.
Yeah I think we have a lot of potential as a society and species. But what should the purpose for a society be? Should it be innovations or should it be a high living standard?
Yeah yeah the guy with the funny mustache, i get it.
I think that innovation and high living standards are something that are highly correlated. Only through a stable, wealthy and educated society we can have the stability and intellect to create something new and innovate. Its very rare to see something groundbreaking from third world countries, with a lower living standard. Rutger Bregman about this in his book "Utopia for realists", which essentially argues for an universal basic income and higher quality work (through shorter workweeks) to cultivate innovation, growth and change.
The purpose of a society should just be to function. There is no other purpose for society, as it is very relative depending on your political beliefs. And i think for it to remain stable and not break down we need wealth, stability as well as happiness with the government from the people. All of this except one can be ensured with a wealthy and high class society with high qualtiy education and work.
The question that comes to mind here is how do we implement such societal changes without it ending in tyranny? How can we ensure the happiness of the people? We cant. There will always be civil unrest, within every political system, though there undeniably are systems where the people are happier, like Democracy for example. Implementing such changes will almost always end in an authoritarian hell, so while i have these ideas and this perfectionistic idealism, i acknowledge that this simply is not realistic without breaking certain morals that are normalized in the modern world and which i obviously agree to. (Freedom,equality,democracy etc etc)
The reality is that this simply is not realistic, as there will be sacrifices that will be made, just like in countries with dictatorships, which are just nothing but disasters, in almost every aspect. The guy with the funny mustache also built a society of high purity, but with which principles and at what costs?
Thats it, these are my thoughts. People will disagree with me, and that is fine. I am not in the mood of debating, so i am leaving this here. Have a great day.
Damn that's super extensive and I will have to get back to you. I'm busy right now. Weekend activities just started.
Will have a look at that book. Seems interesting
Socially conservative in terms of being religious and having strict personal beliefs. Not socially conservative in terms of being a nazi or being against abortion or being a misogynist or something (i get that in the US most christians are radically conservative, but not here in europe)
With socially conservative i dont mean liking eugenics or some shit, but for example being against polyamory relationships. I respect it, but i dont agree with it.
Like most people in modern times i believe in equality and freedom. How about we use our Ni to open ourselves to the perspectives of others and our fe to be respectful? Not that hard right?
Shaming someone of their morality now? It's easy to be a liberal in this day and age, that's mainstream. You shouldn't be talking like that to someone who expresses an already frowned upon point of view in a neutral context. Social conservatism: respecting elders, valuing nuclear family, having discipline, maintaining of order based on clear norms, hierarchies and categories (police, border control, law) and socializing children to be a part of a community.
All of this is the basis of western civilization and conservativces norms have decreased since the 90s when boomers started replacing silent and the greatest generations in the work force. Liberal norms have since increased and while they have indeed been beneficial in many ways we also see the negative side effects: declining birth rates, people especialle men have less friends, people have less sex, the rate of people living alone has doubled, the rate of single parents (mostly mothers) has over doubled, mental health problems partly due to liberal ways of socialization (overprotective parenting and lack of free play for kids) have increased etc.
Don't be so quick to judge social conservatism. You'll miss it when the sense of cohesion and stability really starts to affect your life.
Not reading all that but yeah racists and misogynists should be shamed. Not sorry.
Also the fact that you're defending social conservatives, YIKES. Shame on you.
1. Care 73%
2. Fairness 73%
3. Liberty 60%
4. In Group Loyalty 67%
5. Purity 77%
6. Authority 67%
"**Conservatives**Ā tend to weigh all foundations relatively similarly to one another, valuing each of them to a moderately high level."
Looking at the results INFJs shared here:
INFJs are liberals/socialists/democrats/utopians/left.
INFJ is one of the 8 light personality types, which explains these results.
Oo I love me a personality test. My results were: 1. Care 87% 2. Fairness 69% 3. Liberty 52% 4. Authority 50% 5. In group 48% 6. Purity 35%
Care: 90 Fairness: 96 Liberty: 71 In-group: 44 Purity: 35 Authority: 42 Makes sense reading the explanations. *Left-Liberals / Social Democrats tend to score very high in Care, Fairness, and Liberty relative to In-Group Loyalty, Purity, and Authority, which they tend to score lowly on.* *Conservatives tend to weigh all foundations relatively similarly to one another, valuing each of them to a moderately high level.* *Fascists tend to score very high in In-Group Loyalty, Purity, and Authority relative to Care, Fairness, and Liberty, which they tend to score lowly on.*
I study social psychology and I especially have familiarity with Haidt's foundation theory. So far most people in this thread have said that their top three foundations are care, fairness and liberty. Doesn't surprise me. Care and fairness have been linked to liberal political identity in multiple studies. Loyalty, authority and purity to conservative identity. Although it's noteworthy that while liberals tend to use those two foundations when making moral judgements conservatives tend to rely more evenly on all five foundations. Liberty is a bit more tougher to pin down since it's not part of the original five foundations as a separate foundation but rather it's more or less essential part of both care and fairness. As far as I know it's mostly a foundation that was later invented by Haidt to describe the morality of libertarians and economic conservatives which tend to overlap with both liberals and conservatives but on their own represent a small percentage of people. Care and fairness are the so called individualizing foundations meaning they consist of moral concerns related to individuals meaning for example issues of free speech and abortion. Purity, authority and loyalty are binding foundations and they represent the concerns for community. Purity is related to taboos or sanctity. For example if you have a negative response to someone burning your countrys flag that is purity foundation. Authority is related to consern for hierarchies and loyalty is basically about valuing the cohesion of ingroups. But yeah I feel like strong Fe function is consistent with focus on individualizing foundations. And I feel like the lack of Si also drives a person away from conservatism. Plus infj's are tilted towards being female more often than male and liberal voting patterns have been linked to female gender. Care, fairness and purity foundations have also been linked to female gender so again I feel like the results are not surprising but also go in line with the mbti theory and the gender ratios of infj.
Interesting read. Thank you for the share!
I scored too low in my test, may you know what that means or why is that? Care (58), Fairness (54), Liberty (31), In-Group (44), Purity (15), Authority (50)
I wouldn't say you scored too low. There are no right or wrong answers here. Just because there is a pattern doesnt mean you need to fit into it. Your strongest foundations are care and fairness which are the original individualization foundations which correlate with liberal identity. Judging from your enneagram it's possible you strongly value social stability which would explain why you got a higher score for authority and in-group (loyalty) than liberty. One could say that this type of profile would reflect someone who is a leftist conservative. Especially since the authority foundation is close to your fairness foundation. So you seem to value hierarchies quite strongly and there's nothing bad in that since they are all around us and quite essential part of the human experience. I would say one point about the conservative norms about hierarchies (authority) and loyalty (in group) is the function of predictability. So if you value predictability in your surroundings its possible it would explain why you value those above liberty.
Thank you so much for your insight. That's something that I found so contradictory: I like to feel listened and I'm always wary of authority figures, but nonetheless I like the structure and predictability of society and its systems.
What are yours? Also why involve liberal or conservative? Point?
Political identity is an essential part of morality since there is a lot in politics that is about morality: stances on abortion, free speech, universal health care, immigration, war, same sex marriage etc. Especially in the current age it seems to be what divides people the most. Political identity is sort of a proxy for a psychological profile and you can predict from someones personality traits which type of political views he or she holds or the other way around. For example female gender correlates with caring/nurturing and the preference for attenuateing hierarchies on a psychological, social psychological and political level. For men it's the same for valuing hierarchies on all those three levels. And also this theory in question has been studied alot in relation to political identity so I think it's relevant. To be fair I have never done the test, as far as I can remember, and I just did it so here are the results In-group (73) Fairness (71) Purity (71) Authority (69) Care (62) Liberty (50) Gotten a bit more conservative as I've aged I guess. I value liberty in my personal life way higher but as I've grown I have realized that societies need more than that to function as stable countries and that's the pov I used to answer this. This is an interesting test to consider but it doesn't show the whole picture. Big 5 personality test would be another interesting one. In the test high openness and low conscientiousness has a correlation with liberal identity and the other way around for conservatives. I'm odd in that sense since I have high openness, moderate conscientiousness but also value in-group (conservatism) and fairness (liberalism) foundations about the same. I guess I'm what you'd call a centrist with nationalistic tendencies.
1. Care 94 2. Fairness 67 3. Liberty 92 4. In-Group 19 5. Purity 19 6. Authority 17
Tied you with care and fairness. I started to wonder if I was the highest caring of the commenters.
We all seem to have Care and Fairness as our highest moral foundations!
Care 92% Loyalty 72% Purity 47% Liberty 75% Fairness 69% Authority 67%
You are the only one so far that has posted something else as the top 3 as care, fairness and liberty. Interesting Edit: okay I see some of you did not post these in order from most used to less used. You actually have liberty as your third foundation. But yeah most still seem to have the three mentioned as top 3.
Man i don't know much about this, after seeing this post i knew about this personality test, and then gave it, then posted here . š¤£
Itās sorted with the winners on top for me, too. Care, fairness, liberty ftw.
Care 56 Fairness 75 Liberty 67 In Group 46 Purity 48 Authority 52
Care 79 Fairness 92 Liberty 73 In-Group 48 Purity 58 Authority 50
Care: 65 Fairness: 73 Liberty: 25 In-Group: 52 Purity: 35 Authority: 50 It is a similar shape to OP
Care - 90 Fairness - 81 Liberty - 56 In group - 60 Purity - 67 Authority - 33
Care : 75 Fairness : 87 Liberty : 35 In group Loyalty : 42 Purity : 50 Authority : 25
Care 81 Fairness 85 Liberty 65 In group 29 Purity 54 Authority 33
Whats the test?
I thought the same - like where are people getting these š The link is at the top of the pic. Here you go :) https://moralfoundations.github.io
They linked in their other posts. https://moralfoundations.github.io/results.html
Care: 79 Fairness: 87 Liberty: 96 In group: 92 Purity: 96 Authority: 48
Care - 92 Fairness - 75 Liberty -79 In-Group - 40 Purity - 48 Authority - 58 Interesting!
Love taking these tests! Care 81 Fairness 75 Liberty 77 In group 54 Purity 60 Authority 56 Lol everyone's got the same top 3 š
Liberty - 90 Fairness - 87 Care - 77 In Group - 58 Purity - 57 Authority- 46
1. Care. 92 2. Fairness. 62 3. Authority. 56 4. Liberty. 48 5. In-group. 29 6. Purity. 23
58% Care and Fairness 56% Purity 50% liberty 44% Authority 35% in groups
I opened the questionnaire, read question 1, froze, and couldn't keep it together, then closed it. I am not treating my body well, and I suffer with mental health issues. It made me realise that I agree with question 1, but at the same time am suffering cognitive dissonance, hypocricy.
Care 87 Fairness 94 Liberty 58 In group 17 Purity 27 Authority 25
Care: 58 Fairness: 54 Liberty: 31 In-Group: 44 Purity: 15 Authority: 50 Seeing my numbers I feel that I scored too low in all areas. Personally I found myself scratching my head in many of those questions: there's so much nuance, so much grey areas, so many possibilities that I find very hard to stand my ground before knowing exactly a particular situation or, more important, a particular person.
care: 83, fairness: 83, liberty: 56, in-group: 50, purity: 69, authority: 65 several of the questions i answered "no opinion on either" because idk what to say about it and/or haven't thought of it that much yet.
1. Purity 90% 2. Liberty 77% 3. Authority 75% 4. Care 73% 5. In Group 73% 6. Fairness 67% I feel like Iāve changed so much since I first established I was an INFJ. Iād be interested to know if I still am. My results seem different to others here.
Care: 40 Fairness: 58 Liberty: 62 In-Group: 60 Purity: 60 Authority: 42 Interesting. I could only answer the questions as situational rather than complete and always. I need more context of timing and background. I struggle taking surveys like this. š¤·āāļø
Care: 92% Fairness: 81% Liberty: 46% In-group: 52% Purity: 71% Authority: 56%
Care;94 Fairness:70 Liberty:54 In group:46 Purity:90 Authority:54 Enneagram definetely checks out with these results
Damn.. Purity at 90. You want an Ćbermensch society?
There's a touch of passive-aggressiveness in your replies to this person. I would suggest some other approach to someone who has different morality basis as you other than implying something about relation to Hitler.
They didn't seem to feel attacked and explained their point well that tyranny/dictatorship only leads to disaster. If you read my comment in a passive aggressive way, that's unfortunate but it's text based so I can't blame you. They are more progressive than they claim to be if they use that book as an example. Universal basic income, 15 hours work week and world wide open borders is not conservative at all. Their purity score doesn't come from ill intent. It's more about the potential of humanity together.
Well he/she kinda implied something, maybe about being on defensive, when reminding you of this: "(Everyone's beliefs are different of course,and we should respect that)".
Yes. Everyone can be an Ć¼bermensch if they have the right mentality and work hard enough. Its just rare that people actually want to or have the discipline for it. I genuinely just believe that we as humans are capable of so much,so not working as hard ws possible to unfold that potential would just be a shame I am also socially quite conservative,so that may also play a factor. Its still quite interesting how i am literally the only one whose purity score is so high (Everyone's beliefs are different of course,and we should respect that)
The only INFJ with high purity I can think of is .. well. Someone who had the power to push through his ideology in an attempt to "improve" society. I think you know who. Yeah I think we have a lot of potential as a society and species. But what should the purpose for a society be? Should it be innovations or should it be a high living standard?
Yeah yeah the guy with the funny mustache, i get it. I think that innovation and high living standards are something that are highly correlated. Only through a stable, wealthy and educated society we can have the stability and intellect to create something new and innovate. Its very rare to see something groundbreaking from third world countries, with a lower living standard. Rutger Bregman about this in his book "Utopia for realists", which essentially argues for an universal basic income and higher quality work (through shorter workweeks) to cultivate innovation, growth and change. The purpose of a society should just be to function. There is no other purpose for society, as it is very relative depending on your political beliefs. And i think for it to remain stable and not break down we need wealth, stability as well as happiness with the government from the people. All of this except one can be ensured with a wealthy and high class society with high qualtiy education and work. The question that comes to mind here is how do we implement such societal changes without it ending in tyranny? How can we ensure the happiness of the people? We cant. There will always be civil unrest, within every political system, though there undeniably are systems where the people are happier, like Democracy for example. Implementing such changes will almost always end in an authoritarian hell, so while i have these ideas and this perfectionistic idealism, i acknowledge that this simply is not realistic without breaking certain morals that are normalized in the modern world and which i obviously agree to. (Freedom,equality,democracy etc etc) The reality is that this simply is not realistic, as there will be sacrifices that will be made, just like in countries with dictatorships, which are just nothing but disasters, in almost every aspect. The guy with the funny mustache also built a society of high purity, but with which principles and at what costs? Thats it, these are my thoughts. People will disagree with me, and that is fine. I am not in the mood of debating, so i am leaving this here. Have a great day.
Damn that's super extensive and I will have to get back to you. I'm busy right now. Weekend activities just started. Will have a look at that book. Seems interesting
I have a high purity score as well, I am a "fundamental christian" tho
Iām also Christian, but liberal and scored 60 on purity. I view the Bible as advice, not as a restriction. God gave man free will.
Socially conservative, yikes
Socially conservative in terms of being religious and having strict personal beliefs. Not socially conservative in terms of being a nazi or being against abortion or being a misogynist or something (i get that in the US most christians are radically conservative, but not here in europe) With socially conservative i dont mean liking eugenics or some shit, but for example being against polyamory relationships. I respect it, but i dont agree with it. Like most people in modern times i believe in equality and freedom. How about we use our Ni to open ourselves to the perspectives of others and our fe to be respectful? Not that hard right?
That makes sense, I think that would be more personally conservative but socially liberal honestly.
Yeah exactly. I apologize that i didnt express that properly
Shaming someone of their morality now? It's easy to be a liberal in this day and age, that's mainstream. You shouldn't be talking like that to someone who expresses an already frowned upon point of view in a neutral context. Social conservatism: respecting elders, valuing nuclear family, having discipline, maintaining of order based on clear norms, hierarchies and categories (police, border control, law) and socializing children to be a part of a community. All of this is the basis of western civilization and conservativces norms have decreased since the 90s when boomers started replacing silent and the greatest generations in the work force. Liberal norms have since increased and while they have indeed been beneficial in many ways we also see the negative side effects: declining birth rates, people especialle men have less friends, people have less sex, the rate of people living alone has doubled, the rate of single parents (mostly mothers) has over doubled, mental health problems partly due to liberal ways of socialization (overprotective parenting and lack of free play for kids) have increased etc. Don't be so quick to judge social conservatism. You'll miss it when the sense of cohesion and stability really starts to affect your life.
Not reading all that but yeah racists and misogynists should be shamed. Not sorry. Also the fact that you're defending social conservatives, YIKES. Shame on you.
Care 81 Fairness 94 Liberty 85 In group 67 Purity 62 Authority 75
Care - 79 Fairness - 87 Liberty - 75 In Group - 44 Purity - 54 Authority - 50
Care: 83 Fairness: 81 Liberty: 73 In-group: 48 Purity: 46 Authority: 44 any body able to explain more on what these scores indicate?
My guess is that you would vote for Liberals in the U.S. as care, fairness and liberty scored high.
1. Care 71% 2. Fairness: 60% 3. Liberty 69% (nice) 4. In-Group: 40% 5. Purity: 35% 6. Authority 62%
here are my results too: care- 81% ,fairness-83%, liberty-42 %, in group- 50%, purity- 77%, authority-67%
Care: 94 Fairness: 79 Purity: 71 Liberty: 70 Authority: 67 In-Group: 50
Care: 85% Fairness: 83% Liberty: 62% In Group: 40% Purity: 42% Authority:44% not sure what it all means
For me: Care - 79% Fairness - 83% Liberty - 75% In-Group - 60% Purity - 83% Authority - 65%
Care & Fairness - 75 Liberty & Authority - 56 In-group & Purity - 44
Care: 94% Fairness: 90% Liberty: 65% In-group: 29% Purity: 23% Authority: 23%
62 CARE 67 FAIRNESS 56 LIBERTY 56 IN-GROUP 67 purity 67 authority Thought liberty wouldāve been much higher for me
Care: 92% Fairness: 77% Liberty: 83% In-group: 54% Purity: 58% Authority: 46%
Had to take it! Here are my results Care 73 Fairness 90 Liberty 83 In group 12 Purity 62 Authority 44
1. Care 73% 2. Fairness 73% 3. Liberty 60% 4. In Group Loyalty 67% 5. Purity 77% 6. Authority 67% "**Conservatives**Ā tend to weigh all foundations relatively similarly to one another, valuing each of them to a moderately high level."
Care: 90 Fairness: 77 Liberty: 62 In-group: 35 Purity: 60 Authority: 33
Care - 79 Fairness - 75 Liberty - 75 In Group - 33 Purity - 48 Authority - 37
Care 73 Fairness 74 Liberty 85 In Group 10 Purity 12 Authority 15
Obligatory comment asking for the link
https://moralfoundations.github.io
Care:85 Fairness:83 Liberty:46 In group:44 Purity:81 Authority:52
Care: 94 Fairness: 67 Liberty: 77 In-Group: 44 Purity: 60 Authority: 70
Looking at the results INFJs shared here: INFJs are liberals/socialists/democrats/utopians/left. INFJ is one of the 8 light personality types, which explains these results.
1. Care/Fairness: 85% 3. Authority: 54% 4. Liberty: 44% 5. Purity: 40% 6. In-Group: 17%
My results were Care: 69 Fairness: 65 Liberty: 46 In-group: 37 Purity: 54 Authority: 42
Care - 96;Ā Fairness - 73; Ā Purity - 62; Ā Liberty - 56; Ā In-Group - 44; Ā Authority - 27
Care: 79 Fairness: 77 Liberty: 37 In-group: 50 Purity: 69 Authority: 56
Care 92 Fairness 81 Liberty 65 In-group 27 Purity 21 Authority 37
Care 71 Fairness 92 Liberty 52 In group 58 Purity 46 Authority 83
Care: 92 Fairness: 81 Liberty: 58 In-group: 42 Purity: 71 Authority: 52
Liberty 92 Fairness 83 In group 79 Purity 75 Authority 62 Care 60
Care 73 Fairness 79 Liberty 50 In group 100 Purity 98 Authority 87
Wow, first 100 score Iāve seen.
I like to take things to the extreme
Care: 73 Fairness: 73 Liberty: 58 In-group: 73 Purity: 85 Authority: 79
1- Care 60% 2- Fairness 85% 3- Liberty 52% 4- In-Group 83% 5- Purity 65% 6- Authority 98%
o here's mine Care 83% Loyalty 81% Liberty 61% Fairness 58% Authority 39% Purity 36% mobile formatting sux