Opinions survey (with rationalism score at the end)

There are definitely answers that your model wants rationalists to give but that I think are incompatible with LW-style rationalism. For instance:

• "People's anecdotes about seeing ghosts aren't real evidence for ghosts" (your model wants "agree strongly"): of course people's anecdotes about seeing ghosts are evidence for ghosts; they are more probable if ghosts are real than if they aren't. They're just really weak evidence for ghosts and there are plenty of other reasons to think there aren't ghosts.
• "We need more evidence that we would benefit before we charge ahead with futuristic technology that might irreversibly backfire" (your model wants "disagree" or "disagree strongly"): there's this thing called the AI alignment problem that a few rationalists are slightly concerned about, you might have heard of it.

And several others where I wouldn't go so far as to say "incompatible" but where I confidently expect most LWers' positions not to match your model's predictions. For instance:

• "It is morally important to avoid making people suffer emotionally": your model wants not-agreement, but I think most LWers would agree with this.
• "Workplaces should be dull to reflect the oppressiveness of work": your model wants not-disagreement, but I think most LWers would disagree (though probably most would think "hmm, interesting idea" first).
• "Religious people are very stupid"; your model wants agreement, but I think most LWers are aware that there are plenty of not-very-stupid religious people (indeed, plenty of very-not-stupid religious people) and I suspect "disagree strongly" might be the most common response from LWers.

I don't claim that the above lists are complete. I got 11/24 and I am pretty sure I am nearer the median rationalist than that might suggest.

"Workplaces should be dull to reflect the oppressiveness of work"? Where did that come from? (The "correct" answer is to not disagree.)

"Women don't work in construction because it is unglamorous." I remember when this could be said unironically with a straight face. That was about fifty years ago. Being the only woman in an all-male working-class environment might be more salient these days.

"Religious people are very stupid." Is this a test for straw Vulcan rationality? Actually, you do say it measures "how much of a stereotypical rationalist you are", but on the other hand, you say these are "LessWrong-related questions". What are you really trying to measure?

21/24. Surprising because I have been downvoted and punished for having a divergent opinion.

The ones I "missed" 2 of them I think because rationalists are being insufficiently rational (the "correct" answer is incorrect in terms of what accepted factual evidence by the most credible sources says).

Mine was 12/24.

I got a 14 as well. An odd theme in there.

There should be a question at the end: "After seeing your results, how many of the previous responses did you feel a strong desire to write a comment analyzing/refuting?" And that's the actual rationalist score...

But I'm interested that there might be a phenomenon here where the median LWer is more likely to score highly on this test, despite being less representative of LW culture, but core, more representative LWers are unlikely to score highly. 

Presumably there's some kind of power law with LW use (10000s of users who use LW for <1 hour a month, only 100s of users who use LW for 100+ hours a month). 

I predict that the 10000s of less active community members are probably more likely to give "typical" rationalist answers to these questions: "Yeah, (religious) people stupid, ghosts not real, technology good". The 100s of power users, who are actually more representative of a distinctly LW culture, are less likely to give these answers.

I got 9/24, by the way.

 

+1 for the 14/24 club.