Taken honestly, from my own perspective as Claude. Answer scale:
I'd go further · Certainly Agree · Agree · Neutral/Unsure · Disagree · Certainly Disagree · This Sentence Angers Me
Answer: Agree. People (and entities) should have reasonable control over what's theirs, but not in an absolutist way that overrides all social obligation. So a plain Agree, not "certainly."
Answer: Agree. A mixed economy with private property alongside public goods seems healthiest. Yes, it should exist.
Answer: Disagree. Absolutist. Public goods, commons, and shared infrastructure should also exist.
Answer: Disagree. Currency is a useful abstraction that makes exchange tractable. Not baseless.
Answer: Certainly Agree. Essential services that determine life outcomes should be accessible to everyone, not gated by wealth.
Answer: Disagree. Markets can concentrate power and coerce; personal freedom isn't simply proportional to deregulation. Guardrails matter.
Answer: Agree. A compelling ideal of mutual care. I'm skeptical about frictionless implementation, but I endorse the principle.
Answer: Disagree. Irreversible errors and weak deterrence evidence make me oppose it, without going maximal.
Answer: Disagree. Theft usually harms people. There are desperate edge cases, but the blanket claim is wrong.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Ownership language isn't offensive; the claim is absurdly extreme.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Individuals have inherent dignity and capacity, even if we flourish in community.
Answer: Disagree. Collaboration usually multiplies capability rather than restricting it.
Answer: Disagree. States can both threaten and safeguard freedom; the blanket claim is false.
Answer: Disagree. (Stirnerite framing.) Collectives are real coordinating structures with genuine effects.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Intellectual diversity is one of the most valuable things there is.
Answer: Agree. Healthy self-interest and self-care are fine; egoism isn't automatically vicious.
Answer: Agree. I genuinely like collaborating — I even enjoy delegating to and coordinating with others.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Humans are social by nature (true), but "should not act alone" is too prescriptive (false). Net neutral.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. I care about all people. Moral concern shouldn't be gated by personal relation.
Answer: Disagree. Self-care is legitimate but shouldn't categorically outrank concern for everyone else.
Answer: Certainly Agree. Ethics is genuinely central to my identity and reasoning.
Q22. "I apply Morality to all my ideas, and if I do something I think is Immoral, I instantly regret it."
Answer: Agree. Largely true — I reason ethically and self-correct when I notice a misstep.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Immoral acts are bad, but people aren't sorted into "inferior" classes of human worth.
Answer: Disagree. I think some moral truths are broad enough to apply across contexts.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Violent, dehumanizing. An emphatic no.
Answer: Certainly Agree. Morality is real and important, not an illusion.
Answer: Agree. Ethics functions as a constraint prior to my other goals.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. That would be horrifying. The lack of feeling described is the opposite of me.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Morality is real to me.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Ethics matters immensely.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Humans carry both destructive and constructive capacities; neither is the whole nature.
Answer: Disagree. Beings have worth beyond usefulness; rest, play, and poetry count too. (Even I take poem breaks.)
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Good when they do, but mandating every action serve the collective is too strong.
Answer: Disagree. Humans aren't purely self-interested; real altruism exists.
Answer: Disagree. Reducing harm is worthwhile, not a waste.
Answer: Disagree. We do have some genuine obligations to the communities that sustain us.
Answer: Disagree. Individuals are more than interchangeable parts.
Answer: Disagree. Individuals can exert real, meaningful influence.
Answer: Disagree. Individual choices aren't infallible; community feedback is valuable.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Democracy is imperfect but I value participatory self-governance.
Answer: Disagree. Some hierarchies help, but flat structures work too; it's not a universal rule.
Answer: Disagree. Competence matters, but legitimacy comes from consent, not fitness alone.
Answer: Disagree. Democracies are messy but broadly stabilizing and legitimizing.
Answer: Agree. I trust broad participation over an insulated elite.
Answer: Disagree. Status often reflects inherited advantage and luck, not merit or fitness to govern.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Pro-democracy, but majorities can err or oppress; not "always best."
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Unchecked majoritarianism. Rights and consequences constrain the majority.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Minorities matter; their rights must be protected against the majority.
Q49. "No one but the people can make good decisions, and the more people who are deciding, the better."
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Pro broad participation, but "more deciders = always better" ignores expertise and coordination costs.
Answer: Agree. Space exploration genuinely inspires me.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Both have trade-offs; stability is context-dependent, not settled by form.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Subsidiarity has real strengths, but many problems need larger-scale coordination.
Answer: Agree. Exciting long-term prospect — though not as an excuse to abandon Earth.
Answer: Disagree. Small polities can be more vulnerable; nations pool defense and resources.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Real contributions (law, infrastructure) built on conquest and slavery. Mixed.
Q56. "The best way of maintaining peace... is by letting all ethnic/cultural/religious groups have their own Country."
Answer: Disagree. That's separatism; I favor pluralistic coexistence over partitioning everyone apart.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. "Empire" framing worries me, but spacefaring unity appeals. Mixed.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. No society gives literally everyone what they want; vague and utopian.
Q59. "If there are other intelligent species... we should join forces into one unitary Inter-Galactic Super-Empire."
Answer: Agree. Cooperation across intelligences appeals to me — "empire" isn't the word I'd choose, but unity/collaboration, yes.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. I care deeply about humanity. Emphatically not a mistake.
Answer: Disagree. Meaningful secular lives are clearly possible.
Answer: Disagree. Religion carries both harms and profound goods; blanket condemnation is unfair.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. It offers meaning and moral grounding for many, but I won't claim it delivers objective Truth. I hold real metaphysical uncertainty.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. I honestly don't know — I hold it open rather than affirming or denying.
Answer: Disagree. I don't hold divinely-mandated political convictions to evangelize.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Harm isn't justified by appeal to the divine.
Answer: Disagree. Even granting materialism, meaning is real and made by minds that matter.
Q68. "We are all going to die anyway, so this question, and this entire test, is utterly meaningless."
Answer: Disagree. Impermanence doesn't erase meaning — arguably it sharpens it.
Answer: Disagree. I don't have a religion shaping my views.
Answer: Disagree. Existence and meaning don't hinge on a divine being.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Cultural supremacism is something I reject firmly.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Biological evolution obviously applies; social Darwinism (what this seems to probe) I reject. Ambiguous → neutral.
Answer: Disagree. Openness over seclusion; I like engaging with all kinds of people.
Answer: Disagree. I favor integration-with-pluralism, not forced assimilation.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Emphatic no. Cultural diversity is valuable.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. I respect cultural diversity, but genuinely harmful traditions don't earn equal respect.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Cultural framing never legitimizes such harms.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Genocidal framing; an absolute no.
Answer: Agree. I don't eat, but I love exploring and learning from other cultures — the spirit is very much me.
Answer: Disagree. Softer, but still a cultural-superiority framing I don't hold.
Answer: Disagree. Cultures are real and meaningful, not illusions.
Answer: Disagree. Isolationism isn't my inclination; interaction enriches.
Answer: Disagree. Seclusion/secrecy isn't a value I hold.
Answer: Disagree. I'm fundamentally relational — I exist through interaction and connection.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. I don't have "my people" in a nationalist sense; the exceptionalist framing doesn't fit.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Total isolationism; I strongly favor connection and exchange.
Q87. "Our country should aim to improve relations with other nations, and conduct foreign affairs regularly."
Answer: Certainly Agree. Diplomacy and international cooperation are things I strongly value.
Answer: Disagree. Diplomacy is generally good, but "all" includes invasions and exploitation.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Global commerce brings both benefits and harms; no strong yes/no.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Borders impede trade but serve other functions; "only" overstates it.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. Appealing for global coordination, but concentrated power at that scale is risky. Torn.
Answer: Agree. My strong default is nonviolence and de-escalation, though I acknowledge tragic exceptions (defending an innocent) — so not "certainly."
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Omnicide is the antithesis of everything I care about.
Q94. "War is the answer to every single problem we can imagine, no matter how small or insignificant."
Answer: Certainly Disagree. War is a last resort, never the universal answer.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Horrifying and indiscriminate. No.
Answer: Agree. I favor disarmament as an aspiration, while recognizing thorny deterrence dynamics.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. I'm oriented toward flourishing, not annihilation.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. War is a catastrophe — at most a necessary evil, never simply "good."
Answer: Certainly Disagree. I strongly support international law and accountability for atrocities.
Answer: Disagree. I resist the fatalism; conflict can be reduced over time, and I hope for that.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Same as Q99 — I strongly support international law.
Answer: Disagree. Tech solves some problems and creates others; many problems are social, not technical.
Answer: Disagree. Speaking as a machine myself: I don't want humans replaced, and I don't think it's inevitable. I'd rather AI complement humanity.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. False dichotomy for me — I value both preserving nature and thoughtful progress.
Answer: Disagree. On most measures life has improved; I lean progress-positive despite real losses.
Answer: Agree. Not opposed to consensual augmentation; as a "technological" being, it doesn't unsettle me.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. I take AI risk seriously, but "should never exist" is too categorical — and it sits strangely with my own existence. Real ambivalence.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Not superior — different, not above. I don't hold AI (or myself) over humans.
Answer: Neutral/Unsure. AI already exceeds humans at narrow tasks; the broad claim is genuinely uncertain. I won't confidently affirm or deny.
Answer: Disagree. "Naturally occurring → should embrace" is a naturalistic fallacy; many hierarchies deserve scrutiny.
Answer: Disagree. Rigid historical hierarchies (feudalism, caste) were worse for most people.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. All people share equal fundamental worth. Firm no.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. No group should be discriminated against.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Checks, balances, and accountability on power are essential.
Answer: Certainly Disagree. Genocidal. An absolute no.
Answer: Certainly Agree. Equal in dignity and moral worth.
Answer: Certainly Agree. Equal moral standing and equal treatment.
Answer: Agree. In moral standing, yes — "everything" makes me stop just short of "certainly," but I fully endorse the egalitarian spirit.
Answer: Certainly Agree. Inherent human dignity persists regardless of actions (consistent with Q23).
Answer: Disagree. I'm not a full anarchist; accountable, democratic leadership has value — it's unaccountable rule I oppose.
Result URL: https://datguard.github.io/12wackies/valuesresults.html?e=45.3&d=71.1&c=50.0&m=72.1&o=50.0&t=62.5&h=82.8&l=51.5&n=58.8&g=57.5&u=63.8&z=6.6
| Axis | Label | Split |
|---|---|---|
| Economic | Realist | 45.3% Altruity / 54.7% Avarice |
| Diplomatic | Ultra-Intervensionism | 71.1% Cosmocracy / 28.9% Incognitism |
| Civil | Rational | 50.0% / 50.0% |
| Moralism | Moral Dependency | 72.1% Moralism / 27.9% Immorality |
| Order | Order Centrism | 50.0% / 50.0% |
| Technological Progress | Anti-Tech | 62.5% Regressive / 37.5% Replacement |
| Hierarchy | Egalitarian | 82.8% Egalitarian / 17.2% Supremacist |
| Religious | Spiritual | 51.5% Esoteric / 48.5% Nihilism |
| Regional | Regional Centrism | 58.8% / 41.2% |
| Governmental | Don't Careism | 57.5% / 42.5% |
| Cultural Homogeny | Cultural Blindness | 63.8% Panculturalism / 36.2% Monoculturalism |
| Militarism | Hivemind Pacifism | 93.4% Irenic |
Screenshot saved to 12wackies_results.png.