quote:
Hans Jrgen Eysenck, Ph.D., D.Sc. (1916-1997)
this survey is certainly not his, it has nothing to do with the two "dimension" he used according to:
Hans Eysenck
From wikipedia:
Political spectrum - Wikipedia
Hans Eysenck, in his book Sense and Nonsense in Psychology (1956), proposed a two-axis system to explain political values... Eysenck submitted value questionnaires to the process of factor analysis, finding two factors, the first of which was easily identified as the classical "left-right" dimension, and the second of which he labeled as "tough-mindedness" versus "tender-mindedness." Tough-minded conservatives distinguished themselves from tender-minded conservatives in their heightened support for militarism and harsh punishment and their less favorable attitudes towards religion. Tough-minded radicals were more likely to favor easier divorce laws and fewer restrictions on birth control and abortion, whereas tender-minded radicals were more interested in pacifism and racial equality...
You will notice that the Wikipedia article references a book; you can find one chapter from this book online:
politics
Scrolling to the bottom will take you to Eysenck's old test, where you will notice that the items were not originally worded even by Eysenck himself but instead were
"selected from speeches, books, newspapers, and other sources"; although some efforts have been made to revise the test to bring it more up to date and introduce items that load on the third (S) factor, some items from the online test you took should still be easily recognizable, such as:
Conscientious objectors are traitors to their country, and should be treated accordingly.
There is no harm in traveling occasionally without a ticket, if you can get away with it.
The practical man is of more use to society than the thinker.
Note that some of these questions, such as the last question, are not scored; they are "dummy" questions.
Note also that Eysenck's discovery was empirical rather than theoretical in nature; he discovered two factors (initially) and decided to interpret them as R and T. Specifically, the decision to associate the second of these factors with "toughness" and "pragmatism" vs. "tenderness" and "idealism" was his. Eysenck's research and his interpretations were championed by many but also disliked by many; see for instance _Hans Eysenck: Consensus and Controversy_ where Chris Brand defends Eysenck's model and John Jay Ray attacks it.
quote:
welcome to the fray Lykaios.
Thank you, but now I think I'll leave. I was hoping to test, informally, whether the original finding (which is by now almost a century out of date) that acceptance of evolution was a tough, radical value, and also to see whether the modified test was well balanced regarding the T dimension, but I think I've learned all that I can on this board. I never had any intention of entering any "fray," and while there were a few posters whom I found both reasonable and pleasant, by and large it has been a long time since I found myself in company so obnoxious.