Comment by aston | Hacker News Reader

Comment by aston | Hacker News Reader

This is very poorly set up. What are even the facts of the case?

0. We're instructed to forget what we know about these characters, but then through hints we're supposed to recover the details of these characters' relationships to each other and the world?

1. Is this a real sheriff?

2. Did Robin Hood and Little John do anything deserving of being locked up?

3. What was the previous relationship between Maid Marion and Robin Hood? Were they truly lovers or something less?

4. What was the previous relationship between Maid Marion and the sheriff? Were they necessarily citizens with a power differential?

5. Would the sheriff have released his prisoners the next morning regardless of Maid Marion's actions?

6. Was Robin's "abuse" verbal or physical in nature?

7. What was the previous relationship between Little John and Maid Marion? Were they necessarily unlinked except via a mutual tie to Robin Hood?

8. What was the previous relationship between Little John and Robin Hood? Were they friends with some obligation to each other, or merely cellmates?

9. Was Little John truthful in his promise of devotion?

Many different rankings can stem from differing understanding of those facts rather than differing moral standards. Not to mention the conflation of Honesty with Morality.

I've seen this kind of story in psych class, the missing facts are not an error; they're the point of the story. What you fill in for these holes is supposed to tell something about you.

Another important missing fact: Was the Sherrif's offer time-limited? It makes a difference regarding whether or not he was coercing Maid Marion, whether she had an opportunity to discuss the proposition with Robin, and thus whether Robin is right in considering her actions a betrayal.

Moreover, if we're not assuming anything inherently dishonest with the premise (that two men are in jail), then it is very reasonable to assume that RH and LJ did something dishonest or immoral to begin with. Most people seem to put LJ (whom we are told is a convicted criminal) as one of the most honorable. I bet this would be more pronounced if multiple surveys were given with different names, like if LJ/RH instead had the names of famous criminals.

> We're instructed to forget what we know about these characters, but then through hints we're supposed to recover the details of these characters' relationships to each other and the world?

Honestly, I think that's the point. You're told to forget your predispositions and be objective, and it's the degree to which you're able to and the biases that surface to fill the gaps of unknowns that this test is revealing.

Fair. But then you read the answers list (http://www.talisman.org/cgi-bin/robin-hood-morality?all=true) and learn that there were right answers (jrms, jmsr) and everyone else gets insults.

Yeah, felt the same, but it could be our own head that's just playing against ourselves.. it's a psycho game after all

The hostile tone is part of the game which, in a sense is trying to be well balanced, and it may help to avoid your brain filtering the message.

jrms? Don't you mean jmrs? Or do we disagree on what constitutes an insult?

I think you're trying to include too much context in this. I think the question is purely about how you see the bribery through sex. He's how I read this:

The sheriff's sin is that he can be bribed. He's corrupt.

Marion's sin is that she's willing to bribe to save those she loves.

Robin's sin is that he's jealous and possessive of those around him and doesn't appreciate the sacrifices they made for him.

I can't really see any fault in John. The only way I think you can see any fault in him is if you see Robin's jealousy and possessiveness as justified.

You can see fault in John as an opportunist with no principles. The idea is that he was in love with Maid Marion himself and hid it until a split happened between her and Robin. One could see him and Marion having sneaked around behind Robin's back before the Sheriff caught them.

Note that I don't see it that way, but I know enough traditionally-minded men that I can see how one could view John. They would have preferred that John and guys like him be "men" about it and challenged Robin up front, as soon as he fell in love with her. Of course, that diminishes Robin's ability to choose who she wants to be with, and that's kind of the point. The quiz asks us to use both morality and honesty as our guides, so as to capture the varied ways we apply those terms.

It's a mark of how much our society has evolved that many of us lost touch with this sort of traditional paternalism.

Perhaps a more interesting exercise would be to fill in a backstory for any given ranking. I bet that it could be done.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com