Rejecting 'examination' by conniving fools collecting personal information with bait consisting of false premises and philosophical context dropping is not due to intellectual fear.

Seems some people are afraid to have their beliefs examined (vide Socrates).

Reminds me of the junk one of my ex's used to ask me to answer from her 'Women's Magazines'.

They think that whatever they do is 'science' and 'good' because they are viros.

Agreed, I am not trying to save the environment and that doesn't mean I am careless and pour the used oil from my car in my garden assuming there are no bad consequences. The idea of saving the environment is misplaced by most green earthers thinking that what ever they do uses less fuel and produces fewer hydrocarbons. Most of the choices have the opposite effect.

The primary purpose of morality is a standard for making choices in your own life. Relations to others is secondary to the individual: The standards for interacting with others is a consequence of a rational ethics for the individual. See Ayn Rand's article "The Objectivist Ethics" in The Virtue of Selfishness. It is the ethics of Atlas Shrugged.

The choice of transportation is a false alternative. The premise that you should be out to "save the environment" is false.

I believe the Checker mistakenly thought I was in
favor of "affirmative action". I am not, but if some-
one was recently mugged and is waiting for treat-
ment in a hospital, perhaps that person should be
treated before someone who has had only a mild injury.

also, as to "natural" vs. "unnatural"; yes, one should kill germs, even though they are natural;
but this is different from pervertin nature.

I got a 27, because I found logical errors in the way many of he questions were presented. Worse, I got a 41% on the follow up morality one, which I think means they think I am a bad person. Obviously, they are not Objectivists. In school I used to argue during tests that questions presented multiple choices, none of which as state were correct.
These questions reminded me of the "values clarification" exercises they used health class to give to high school students when my daughter was that age.

Yes, I did, too. This test had little to do with common sense. It was flawed from the start.

An excellent argument against the collective of sameness.

The more I think about that test I fully took, I smell the same.

I chose both the car and the environment too.
Seemed like common sense to old dino.

Shows you how flawed these tests can be because of the waffle-ness of definition these days. I didn't find the test that useful as there are a lot of things that could go either way depending on your definition of words being expansive or very narrow. I'm beginning to suspect these tests are for producing desired effects in people rather than giving you useful information.

Yes! Almost all of those questions are the basis by which we all form our opinions on numerous issues. Thankfully we all tend to have some very similar and some very different opinions on various subjects. This place would be a complete bore if we all agreed and that goes for this world as well.

MeToo...it's bewildering. I will say this, these non qualifying questions are difficult to answer definitively.

I got 33 as well Carl and find it interesting that we often agree here. Oddly enough I do not feel all that conflicted in my life but I do wonder about those who remained well below the average of 27.

The "test" is riddled with specious reasoning, question-begging, and agenda-laden premises. Ayn Rand had a rebuttal to lifeboat situations as examples of moral tests.

For example, it is not a contradiction to say art is a matter of taste and that Michelangelo is a great painter. On the latter point, a majority of people evidently share the same taste.

I quit before finishing the question of the impending train wreck. I refused to choose either of their answers, and they would not let me skip it. The test composers word questions to trick you into choosing something that will seem contradictory, yet there are epistemological choices between their either/or extremes. I say, Bah, humbug, to the test. The only thing amusing about it is trying to identify the points they are trying to propagandize. I smell a progressive rat.

2 tensions
First:
Morality is relative.
Genocide is evil.
Second:
Treat others as they merit.
Discriminate positively to those wronged.

First: Arthur Eddington held for a Selective Subjectivism or otherwise referenced as Scientific Epistemology. And here I will too. Has to do with defining morality. In my case morality is to groups as self-interest is to the individual. Groups or A group on the butt end of genocide feel evil. I can understand that quarantine and killing is a survival tool for other groups justified to my satisfaction or not.

Second:
I see another held back; a captive by poverty or another chain, but otherwise capable, I will personally move positively to rectify the injustice if I'm able.

I wish I had thought of the collection of data and me being the product as opposed to free entertainment. I didn't score well, I seem to have a lot of tension as purported by the question of would I take the train versus my car to 'save the environment' I chose my car because it is more efficient than the train which is rarely full and needs an 80% capacity fill to be less polluting than my car! Most buses are rarely full and burn far more energy per individual than my car with only me in it! The bus fails to mention that you will have to take more than one to get where you want to go on a circuitous route rather than a direct route allowed by controlling my conveyance to go where I need to go and not waiting for their schedule to match mine.

Wish I read what ewv wrote before jumping in to take that test while working on my first cup of coffee.
Government, are you from the Government?

Got a score of 1 and am good with that.

"7" and I'm just fine with that, considering the average of 27......

Me dino is a complicated dictionary definition mystic also trained to be a killer and I almost had to do it and would have one day.
I also think art appreciation has a lot to do with taste but that Michelangelo is a great painter. So freaking what?
My score is my business.

I got a 0. Then they advise you to take the test again just to see what you're repressing :-)