Machiavelli Personality Test

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Out of curiosity, I'd like to see how Machiavellian various Orgahs are. This is a personality test - fairly apolitical, which is why I put it in the Frontroom.

Here is the test (http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/09/13/machtest/).

Here is a very brief explanation:


This survey itself measures only one thing -- whether you subscribe to the ideas of a 16th century Italian political philosopher. But experiments have shown that reactions to Machiavelli act as a kind of litmus test, delineating differences in temperament that can be confirmed with more traditional personality inventories. High Machs constitute a distinct type: charming, confident and glib, but also arrogant, calculating and cynical, prone to manipulate and exploit. (Think Rupert Murdoch, or if your politics permit it, President Clinton.)

True low Machs, however, can be kind of dependent, submissive and socially inept. So be sure to invite a high Mach or two to your next dinner party.

Here are my results:



The Machiavelli personality test has a range of 0-100

Your Machiavelli score is: 85

"high Mach", you endorse Machiavelli's opinions.

Most people fall somewhere in the middle, but there's a significant minority at either extreme.

[Reverend Joe]

36.

I'm a puss. :shame:

[Beirut]

63

Also the year I was born. Dig it. ~:smoking:

[ShadesPanther]

73
weeeee

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Failed me with a 51. ~;p
.

[Craterus]

68.

[seireikhaan]

67.

[Rhyfelwyr]

68

Strange, never really saw myself as a Machiavellian thinker...:shrug:

[Kagemusha]

64.

[Mouzafphaerre]

63

Also the year I was born. Dig it. ~:smoking:
.
1863?! :shocked:
.

[woad&fangs]

Strange, never really saw myself as a Machiavellian thinker...:shrug:

Same here
71

[Reverend Joe]

Looks like I'm special. ~;p

[CountArach]

49

I would have thought I would end up around the 30 mark.

[El Diablo]

70

But I have no idea what that means.

Hopefully it precludes a career in politics with a penchant for Cigars and Interns. :laugh4:

[DemonArchangel]

I got an 80. I'm not cynical enough I suppose. Although I've read enough Machiavelli to know what he would have answered on that test.

[Incongruous]

75, hmm not what I wanted really...
Oh well.:embarassed:

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I got an 80. I'm not cynical enough I suppose. Although I've read enough Machiavelli to know what he would have answered on that test.

I own a copy of The Prince, but I tried to answer as close to my own beliefs as possible. I left one or two questions neutral.

[TevashSzat]

86 for me

[Csargo]

60.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I'm 53, low mach. Some of you guys are really cynical.

[Gaius Scribonius Curio]

75. I've read The Prince and could guess what Machiavelli would have answered, but tried to be honest.

Strange though, I wouldn't have considered myself remotely Machiavellian. :dizzy2:

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I'm 53, low mach. Some of you guys are really cynical.

I scored a 53 too. I could score way higher if I threw my morals out the door, but I do have morals. Plus a lot of the questions asked for generalizations that I wasn't comfortable making. For example all people are generally good, well I can't disagree or agree with that because people just are!!!

[Togakure]

72. High Mach. No surprises here.

[Ice]

scored a 75

[Ramses II CP]

81.

I've read The Prince, but I'm also a generally paranoid person. I suspect I surrendered most of those points for not wanting to suck up to powerful people. :laugh4:

:egypt:

[Veho Nex]

56
Low Mach I reject his opinions.

[LittleGrizzly]

65... high mach

[Martok]

Another 53 here. I'm fairly cynical, but I also have enough morals to counteract that fact.

I also agree with the points made by Uesugi Kenshin; I don't care for broad generalizations all that much.

[Caius]

55 for me.

[Kekvit Irae]

85
:book:

[Whacker]

75.

/shrug

I consider myself a realistic, and neither optimistic or pessimistic. I have not read any of Machiavelli's works either.

[pevergreen]

90.

[Csargo]

75.

/shrug

I consider myself a realistic, and neither optimistic or pessimistic. I have not read any of Machiavelli's works either.

liez. Every single word is a lie. I can tell. I have mad skillz

[Zim]

84 for me. :sweatdrop:

[Rodion Romanovich]

87...

I would have expected no other than high results here, since it's a war strategy gaming forum.

[MerlinusCDXX]

83 Damn, I didn't think I was that ruthless.

[Andres]

65.

[naut]

54. No suprises there.

[DukeofSerbia]

61 - high mach

[Raz]

63, but I hardly used any extreme, that is - putting a one or five down. Does this make me cool?

[I of the Storm]

79. I was expecting this.
Working in academic environment and dealing with a lot of complicated egos more or less forces you to become macchiavellistic...

[FactionHeir]

High mach: 69

[_Tristan_]

82... Comes with the job...

[edyzmedieval]

I got 77.

[Quirinus]

I got 69, which is a pretty vanilla sort of result. Oh well.

[Kralizec]

70.

[scotchedpommes]

Yet another 53, is me.

[Somebody Else]

71 - high enough to be interesting, not so high as to make me too much of an arrogant git. (n.b. for those who scored lowly, I didn't agree with pandering to people and telling them what they want to hear :drama1:)

[Veho Nex]

Wheres sinans input on this one,

Got money says hes really high or really low. I cant imagine him being any where between 35-75

[Warluster]

I am recorded as 61.

[CrossLOPER]

59

I guess I'm a little bit paranoid.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Yet another 53, is me.

Liar! You are far too cynical to get 53, I got 15 points more than that!:dizzy2:

[Motep]

I believe that it is good to be moral, and that you should not suck up to others!

I got a 77.

[Punicus]

55 for me.
Yep, same here.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

48

Well,

[Viking]

73 - I feel like a moral high now. :inquisitive:

[Subedei]

56....I still have [2much?] faith in humanity I guess....:inquisitive:

[Ronin]

84 here...

uhm...I have never even read "The Prince"...something to look up next time i´m in the book store...MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :laugh4:

[TinCow]

59 - "low Mach"
Higher than I expected. I do think Machiavelli's methods are an accurate way to gain power. I agreed with him for a long time, until I decided that having power was not something I wanted. Now I just try to live a simple, enjoyable life and Machiavelli's methods are not a good guidebook for that kind of existence.

[Rodion Romanovich]

84 here...

uhm...I have never even read "The Prince"...something to look up next time i´m in the book store...MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :laugh4:
Check www.gutenberg.org

[Innocentius]

90, and I consider Machiavelli to have been a complete idiot (by modern standards, that is).

[The Stranger]

high mac 73

[Samurai Waki]

High Mach 85

[Abokasee]

62

Im a high match

[macsen rufus]

*cough* 86 *cough*

Mostly due to my generally poor opinion of the average human being, and a growing sense of disillusionment with ideals and idealism. Oh, well, I can live with it :laugh4:

[Conradus]

55, though I did tend to answer idealistically whilst I realize that most people aren't as I picture them.

[King Henry V]

79

Well, what can I say? The ends justify the means.

[lars573]

77. I just can't suck up to people. :no:

[Tristuskhan]

72... how could I?

[ICantSpellDawg]

i got 64.

[Good Ship Chuckle]

I got exactly 50.

I guess that means I can go both ways. :juggle: A "middle Mach", as it were.

[Ravencroft]

I'm a High Mach with 84.

I answered honestly...<crosses fingers>