I am a 76 out of 100 which isn't quite the true Mach-IV master dude. I was probably too reluctant on certain questions to give a full agree or full disagree.
openpsychometrics.org
P.S. Merkel has reportably scored a 94 on the Mach IV test and Trump probably scores a cold, nice 100 out of 100.
Other urls found in this thread:
openpsychometrics.org
twitter.com
>Machiavellianism
>A Good thing.
You are a fucking pleb.
My dark triad score is low as FUCK. I have morality and integrity, something that comes with actual maturity.
KYS.
100
Tell me why a high Mach-IV score is not a good thing.
Thanks.
P.S. if you actually read the questions in the test you would know what I am talking about.
>KYS.
I trust your Mach-IV score is higher than my 76 if you answer the questions truthfully.
solid 88
54 and I answered as accurately as I can
why are civilised middle easterners more often than not more moral than europeans?
I don't believe this test accurately captures a personality trait for those who are able to consider these questions philosophically.
People's personality and behavior can conflict with that they consider wise or technically true. Psychology BTFO btw
82 btw
Is this like how psycho you are?
t. Facebook boomer
>Is this like how psycho you are?
No, it is a test which shows whether you agree or disagree with the principles laid out by Machiavelli in his book The Prince written 500 years ago.
Some people call Machiavelli "evil" or a "psycho" as you, others call him a genius and a person who saw the world how it really was (and still is). I am in the second camp, so for me a low score means "bluepilled" while a high score means "redpilled".
Get in my level moralfags
full 100
that means that I can outjew the jew
74
>leaf
Scores 65 so I’m fairly run of the mill in my machiavellianess
Being this edgy
57. Am I Normie?
no, that means that you have to trust me.
The questions are fucking retarded, you're going to score high if you're not naive about things. Just a terrible test through and through. Might as well be are you a realist test.
>He doesnt know Machiavelli was satire.
Sad user, just sad.
This is data mining but here’s mine
machiavelli level: over 9000
the data is useless, though
I answered the questions the first timein a way which was the more logical and a true way of how I view my self and the way I view people and I scored a 62. I then retook it and answered in the most cynical ways possiable and scored a 100. Trump knows how to play ball that is why he scored a 100.
97
Everyone I know tries to put me down
I learned the hard way not to say anything negative about yourself to ANYONE
Opening up to people is a meme
>philosophy I disagree with is edgy
Don’t you realise that by using Machiavellian ideas you can better persuade people to follow moral convictions? Take a pragmatic approach to it.
Mines not bad.
A sweet 89.
It’s psychological profiling, and even if this thread isn’t data mining I’m sure there are government of media anons ITT and are trying to determine if your average Jow Forums user is more or less Machiavellian than your average person. This thread has appeared several times but I don’t mind contributing because I’m curious as to the profile of your average user here.
55
You don’t know what Machiavellianism, do you?
Nope, just a leaf.
it's useless, because what will this knowledge give them? what will be the actual gain? like
>okay boys, let's launch the shill machine 2k onto these suckers
or
>hmmm, Jow Forums is machiavelian, we have to shut it down, I repeat, shut it down with extreme prejudice
we are much worse than machiavellic, we are the ocean of human waste (a.k.a. piss)
>This thread has appeared several times but I don’t mind contributing because I’m curious as to the profile of your average user here.
>it hasn't appeared ever
>plus you haven't even stated your score despite posting 5 replies
Jesus Christ, my Mach-IV score got 2 points lower because I told you the truth in your posting face
The Mach III Turbo is more useful.
I have a very low estimation of other people and I acknowledge that I lie and obfuscate my intentions for why I do things because of this. I don't really think this chart proves much other than being a benchmark for people who are truthful about how they approach situations. The more idealistic you view yourself and others the less your score will be. If you accept humans as flawed and selfish desperately trying to trying to scratch out a slight hovel to exist using any means possible you score higher.
I used the Mach 3 for many years... until I realized it is a fucking rip-off and that razors 5 times cheaper work just as good.
Fuck Gillette, they are the Apple of the razor world.
Can't say I'm happy about the score, the questions really hit the cynicism button.
>Machiavellian
It's pretty fucking obvious we all are.
I don't know what they will gain from the data mine though.
Unless it's a correlation of intelligence, and from a lot of Jow Forums users, I know a large percentage of us here are high tier scientists and coders.
If not the above, then well read historians.
It's most likely sizing up our capabilities.
I'm well aware this is probably all being recorded but I'm proud of my score; 88.
>high tier scientists and coders.
shhh.... ((((we are not))))
we are just posting satire
>Wanted to do this as honest as possible without giving meme answers
100/100
Straight razors are nice.
I have 4, need to get a 7 day set though.
Steel needs to rest after stropping.
Expensive though...
Agreed, if asked how I would like things to be I would answer far more idealistically, as they are phrased even as I believe how you should act would be to act in a way that is best for you in the world we live now, thus I answer cynically. Rather instead I would love if we didn't have to manipulate others to get what we want, but that is the world we have created.
Of course this is a satirical website, otherwise I wouldn't have lied...just then.
Cough.
I probably would have gotten 100 if i didn't put neutral on 2 of them.
70. The parts where I lost 30 points are obviously where Machiavelli was wrong.
What? Not trying to be rude, I understand that English is your first language, but unless I’m schizophrenic a thread very similar to this one (with a German OP) has appeared before.
Also the second post I made contained my results, see
>Jesus Christ, my Mach-IV score got 2 points lower because I told you the truth in your posting face
I don’t know what you mean by this. The reason why I don’t mind contributing is because data mined ITT won’t be very useful, as other anons have pointed out.
If you answer this test honestly you aren’t Machiavellian at all.
84 you glow in the dark
I was expecting less
>Unless it's a correlation of intelligence, and from a lot of Jow Forums users, I know a large percentage of us here are high tier scientists and coders.
>If not the above, then well read historians.
>It's most likely sizing up our capabilities.
I’d say more genuinely intelligent people representatively than most of the population, but there’s also a lot of anons on this board that are borderline retarded.
An Evola test would be more fun desu.
About average.
0, I'm a good boy who never did nothin to nobody
That is true also.
It's kind of like the inverse of the real world.
Good goyim. Don't be too surprised if this exact thread appears on a future (((study))) regarding psychological profiling of Jow Forums users, it's just "for scientific purposes", heh heh.
>a low score means "bluepilled" while a high score means "redpilled"
Not necessarily. I know some people who think they're good negotiators/manipulators, but in reality they're fucking retards whom the rest just tolerate and do things for them out of pity and/or to be left alone rather than being "persuaded" in any means by the former.
54
I got an 80
People that are posting their results on the Facebook feed are stupid
>hurr durr Im cunning like Machiavelli I trick people
Lol silly kikebook morons
h-heil
Jew/100
81 out of 100. It might have been higher if I decided to be an edgy faggot and answer the questions based on what would get the highest results like some of the faggots here do on these tests.
I scored sage/100
>"It is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there."
>"It is wise to flatter important people."
>"Anyone who completely trusts anyone else is asking for trouble."
>"Most people are brave."
>"P.T. Barnum was wrong when he said that there's a sucker born every minute."
It's not like any of the statements provide a some sort of moral dilemma, where you have to overtly choose personal gain over morality. They're just common sense statements, that are hard to answer not in the Machiavellian direction.
So that means they are being Machiavellian to score higher on the tests?
Got a B+ (84)
97
I am probably wasting my time at my current job
74 how did i do?
Hey guy, i got 76 too
94
Really activates the ol' almonds.
Well thats not what redpilled and bluepilled means, but a low score would be less manipulative and dishonest while a high score would be more.
I'm neutral on some questions because that would imply honesty and honesty is a shortsight in calculated manipulation. Machevelli espoused the idea hat one should appear to be benevolent, and that the idea of expressing one's moral ambiguity or lack thereof is something a powerful person must not do.
Most successful altruists are Machiavellian in method.
>Hey guy, i got 76 too
Now let's see if you score the same as me on the "which women do I like" test... then we can blood-test-bros.
dont you realize that practicing something because it's useful doesn't equal believing it's "right" to do so?
>the leaf is an autistic faggot
This and more obvious realizations to come on your local Kyrgyzstani Hentai board at 11PM.
You are welcome, botnet. The questionnaire is too dependent on ideology and not enough on behavior.
>73/100
Does this mean i'm a good person? What is this
This gif is shit. Even the designer of it didn't bother to create the illusion of the existence of an illusion in it, in the last frame you see the crab teleporting to the starting position with no logical link between the two existing.
Yeah but doing the test and revealing your power level is the least Machiavellian thing you can do.
People who score higher are less Machiavellian by virtue that they forget the entire clandestine aspect of being a powerful leader. Being in the middle is the base line, scoring extremely low is the same as appearing good.
So? Does not address my points in the slightest, the statements are shit.
Here's examples of a good statement for this test:
>"I would backstab my best friend if it mean I could climb to the top of a multi billion dollar company"
>"I would not help my parents/relatives if it meant it would be heavily financially taxing to do so"
If you're truly Machiavellian wouldn't you purposely score low?
and another one...
All I have to say is: "Gibbs me dat foe free nigguh"
Anybody else notice some of the imptrash coming in today isn't as REDPILLED HAIRCUT tier as it usually is? I mean, it's still shit, just not the rejected conspiracy general + epic e-celeb/political kinda shit.
52/100
So is that good or no?
But it's the opposite. People who score higher are MORE Machiavellian.
And why the fuck did this thread get moved to Jow Forums when Machiavelli is distinctly a political figure. fucking dumbass mods
Probably because we questioned it's placement and reason for it's usage.
Basically, is it (((trickery)))?
I scored a 59 so we're about the same. Machiavelli is utilitarianism at its finest. you're less dishonest and manipulative than most others.
take it fwiw
>we questioned why a political thread should be on Jow Forums
so, fucking dumbass mods?
But if you could score our endgame and all it took was lying to a few people, what's wrong with that?
Fuck, i'd wipe out half the Earth and tell them it's for the greater good.
The greater good of course, being whatever I want.
Basically.
well if you're still around since the move
89 and 112
But i'm pretty particular and have a type, so not many were a strong preference, the darkies and the chows were an instant negs..
This looks fun.
Count me in cunt. Where's the link?
In the comment i replied to
I have morality and integrity, but I also know that a lot of people are dumb pieces of shit.