Loading page content
Original self-reflection questionnaire · Full results free
Reflect on 32 original political-principle statements in four authored topic groups. Read separate sums, means or uncertainty and all four full guides without a purity score.
32 questions · about 8 minutes · no signup
Read each item as a proposition in a hypothetical political-principle discussion. Choose Strongly disagree, Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Agree or Strongly agree, without assuming it states current law or a verified policy outcome. If essential information is missing, the proposition cannot represent your position or you prefer not to answer, choose the separate NA. There is no preselected response. All thirty-two items need a selection; each group needs all eight valid ratings for a personal sum and mean. Four statements in every group use the opposite key. Optional drafts stay in this tab, and no identifying information is requested.
Preparing the test…
All questions and full results are free, with no signup. Saving is optional; only saved attempts can be resumed after a refresh or language change. Tab drafts expire after 24 hours and clear on completion or retake.
This original bilingual edition asks how you respond to thirty-two stated political principles. Eight items concern autonomy and consent, eight voluntary cooperation, eight property claims and rectification, and eight limits and justification of public coercion. These are our editorial topic groups, not established psychological factors or a complete definition of libertarianism. Political philosophy contains substantial internal disagreement about resource ownership, rights and the state. Separate sums and means describe agreement with the particular keyed propositions offered here. They do not decide your identity, party, ideological purity or population position. All four full guides remain free and available even without a personal score.
The thirty-two bilingual propositions and four topic groups are authored for this edition, not empirical factors or a validated libertarianism inventory. Each group has eight agreement responses coded one to five. In its displayed order, positions two, four, six and eight face the opposite way and use six minus the response. Add all eight adjusted values for a sum from eight to forty; divide the unrounded sum by eight for the mean displayed to two decimals. Thirty-one gives 3.875, displayed 3.88. Decimals make the calculation reproducible without proving equal psychological distances.
All thirty-two items need selections, including NA. A group needs all eight valid responses for its own personal figures; any NA withholds only that group. A low agreement score is not missing information. A higher mean means more endorsement of these keyed propositions, not a purer or better political identity. Means are not added, ranked across groups or converted to percentages, parties, people, population norms or political predictions. All four full guides remain available, including higher, lower, mixed and insufficient readings, exact examples, counterexamples and non-directive comparisons.
Libertarianism is a diverse family of political philosophies, not simply the economic-right and liberal quadrant of another test or a metaphysical test of free will. This new wording, topic grouping, translation and NA rule have no established psychometric or cultural-equivalence validation. Theory references explain concepts without validating the bank. No party, candidate, campaign or personalized political persuasion is recommended. Optional drafts stay in this browser tab for at most twenty-four hours and clear on completion or retake; sharing copies a public title and link without responses, sums or means.
Read what each of the 4 parts explores. Your complete result presents them together; they are not mutually exclusive personality types. These public guides contain no one’s answers or personal means.
Eight original propositions ask about peaceful association, agreement to use someone’s effort and justifications for overriding a personal choice. The summary describes agreement with these specified propositions, not a degree of libertarian identity or a moral quality.
Eight authored statements ask about disclosed terms, alternative partners and limits on overriding a peaceful arrangement. Responses describe agreement with this limited set of propositions, not whether you are cooperative in everyday life or belong to a political tradition.
This authored group joins eight propositions about legitimate acquisition, peaceful use, wrongful takings and opportunities to challenge reassignment. It does not declare all existing holdings just or settle the disputes among libertarian accounts of natural resources.
Eight original propositions concern justification, official status, challenge procedures and a presumption for individual freedom. Their mean describes these responses without measuring trust in government, assigning an ideology or deciding whether a real legal action is valid.
An original FermatMind Principles Reflection: thirty-two new bilingual statements in four authored topic groups. It is not the competitor’s thirty-four-item questionnaire, the sixty-four-item Libertarian Purity Test or a validated political identity inventory.
They organize propositions about autonomy and consent, voluntary cooperation, property and rectification, and public coercion. They are editorial groups rather than established psychological factors; different libertarian traditions can disagree about the principles and their implications.
Codes run from one to five. Positions two, four, six and eight in each group use six minus the selected code. Add all eight adjusted values, then divide the unrounded sum by eight. A sum of twenty-nine gives 3.625, displayed 3.63; there is no combined total or hidden weight.
Each item still needs a selection, but an NA withholds only its own group’s personal sum and mean. Other fully answered groups can appear, and all four complete guides remain available. Missing information is not neutral agreement or a low score.
No. It describes agreement with the offered keyed propositions only. There are no party or politician matches, ideological purity percentages, population norms, voting predictions or established Chinese–English measurement equivalence.
All thirty-two items and four full guides are free without signup. Saving is optional in this tab for up to twenty-four hours and clears on completion or retake. Shared text contains only a public title and link without personal answers or numbers.
These sources provide background, not validation of this questionnaire or an individual diagnosis.
Website content edition 1.0.0 ·
Source question / scoring / report versions: 1.0.0 / 1.0.0 / 1.0.0