posted August 07, 2013 01:27 AM            

quote:

---

Machiavellianism is, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, "the employment of cunning and duplicity in statecraft or in general conduct", deriving from the Italian Renaissance diplomat and writer Niccolò Machiavelli...

Machiavellianism is also a term that some social and personality psychologists use to describe a person's tendency to be unemotional, and therefore able to detach himself from conventional morality and hence to deceive and manipulate others. In the 1960s, Richard Christie and Florence L. Geis developed a test for measuring a person's level of Machiavellianism (sometimes referred to as the Machiavelli test).

People scoring high on the scale (high Machs) tend to endorse statements such as, "Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so," (No. 1) but not ones like, "Most people are basically good and kind" (No. 4), "There is no excuse for lying to someone else," (No. 7) or "Most people who get ahead in the world lead clean, moral lives" (No. 11). Using their scale, Christie and Geis conducted multiple experimental tests that showed that the interpersonal strategies and behavior of "High Machs" and "Low Machs" differ

---

So, I was wondering if maybe we could find some common astrological aspects and signs among High Machs and Low Machs in the forum.

I usually float between 70 and 80 whenever I take it, which apparently makes me a High Mach.

I'm guessing it's probably related to Pluto and Scorpio, maybe?

posted August 07, 2013 01:53 AM            

I have my Moon in Capricorn, Sun in Taurus, Asc. in Aries, Venus in Gemini.

I have a wide Sun opposite Pluto, that might be it. Pluto is also in my 7th House so the way I interact is Plutonian, you could say.

posted August 07, 2013 01:59 AM            

quote:

---

Kerosene: I completely disagreed with the whole property vs parent thing. which probably brought score down a lot.

---

posted August 07, 2013 02:05 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by somethingexcellent:
I answered like 90% of the question "neutral" because it wasn't asking what /I/ would do, but asking what people in general would do, in which case I tried to view the questions objectively. So maybe my score would be higher too...

---

So did I, aren't suppose to answer like that?
like I said I'm cynical and I don't really trust peoples intentions..

posted August 07, 2013 11:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
I don't think the test would've been accurate for me. Still, I went through it and then agreed to take the extra questions and got trapped on some market research (that is, I couldn't get the results without continuing and I just exited their Machiavellian screen). I don't plan to try again, but I advise others not to take the extra questions.

---

posted August 07, 2013 01:52 PM            

This puts you in the category of the high Machs, people who do not belive in the goodness of the world and that because that it must be manipulated, people who Machiavelli would approve of.

I guess that makes me his Associate or President of his fan club.

posted August 10, 2013 09:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kerosene:
I completely disagreed with the whole property vs parent thing. which probably brought score down a lot.

Only completey empty people would actually do that.
Even criminals and mobsters are defensive over their mama!

---

I could see some people doing that. Particularly hard-core defenders of capitalism. I've seen a few people defend "the right of coroporatios to make a profit" over the life of people, and I'm not exagerating here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:

And just for the record, I disagree (or find too limiting) the difference between High Machs and Low Machs, or at least the implication that most people can be neatly divided into the 2 groups (or at least within that spectrum as shared by the OP).

---

I concur, though I think the point was about how likely it is for a person to agree with basic notions of Machiavellianism and behave in a Machiavellian way in certain situations.

It usually isn't taken into isolation but as part of the Dark Triad of Narcissism and Psycopathy, since they all overlap in a way.

posted July 31, 2014 05:16 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by StarlightSmileSupreme:
53 - Low Mach or anti-Machiavelli. I wouldn't earn a slot on his team of political advisers.

Yeah, Kero, me too. Trying to think if I know anyone who doesn't revere their parents. Not a soul.

---

I got 53 also.

I have Machiaveli Conjunct Pluto +3 degrees and Trine AC +1 degree.

posted July 31, 2014 09:21 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doux Rêve:
Took it again, I was sure it'd be lower this time, but: "Your score was 80 of 100."

I am definitely not a Mach though. I just know that everyone has a dark side and no one can be trusted fully.

---

I dunno, Doux---you French girls have a reputation for being sneaky.

Wouldn't be surprised if you had actually scored off the charts but are playing it down to lull Lindaland into a false sense of security.

I'm onto your evil plot, Frenchie.
--------------------------
AND

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dancing Maenad:
53 here also. Too idealistic to be machiavellic.

---

Dude, don't you cut people's faces for money? Know who else does that? Pimps. And not the kind with the big fluffy coats and the cool walking sticks either. The scary kind.

Sounds pretty Machiavellian to me.
--------------------