The Philosophical Compass
I'll bet most of you are familiar with the Political Compass by now. A lot of people seem to like it, and it's better than a single left/right axis I guess, but I've always found it pretty hopelessly deficient. For one thing, "left" and "right" have been used to mean so many different things since their origin in the French parliament that they've lost much of their descriptive power. "Authoritarian" and "libertarian" also miss lots of nuance, which is why libertarians are almost indistinguishable from the right wing and why the right-authoritarian quadrant is overstuffed while the left-libertarian quadrant remains nearly empty.
In recognition of these weaknesses, I've come up with a second compass which can be considered either a replacement or a complement.
I believe that the pluralist vs. conformist distinction is the most important one of all. I can usually tell where someone lies on that axis before I can determine any of their other sociopolitical inclinations, and it seems less amenable to change. It's tempting to associate forced conformity with the authoritarian right (especially its religious elements) but it's quite prevalent on the so-called left as well - from authoritarian tankies to libertarian-adjacent anarchists. It's pretty much why I don't identify with the so-called left; I have no patience for people who claim to be fighting for tolerance and inclusion while exhibiting their exact opposites.
Empirical vs. dogmatic is less self-explanatory. A dogmatist is one who believes that the most important truths are already known, often handed down from on high, and fixed. An empiricist believes truth is something still to be discovered, grounded in data, and subject to revision. This distinction shows up a lot in issues such as climate change, vaccines, or gender. Again the religious aspect is relevant, but there are plenty of dogmatists who believe that all truth comes from a secular leader instead.
If I was about to be introduced to someone and wanted to know what kind of person they are, I'd find a description in these terms far more useful than in terms of the standard political compass. There are some right-wing beliefs that I consider respectable, even though I strongly disagree. There are even some authoritarian beliefs I can accept, on the more institutionalist (vs. personalist) side. I can be friends with such people, sometimes. But if I know someone's a dogmatic conformist, I'm just going to stay away because one of us will definitely trigger the other.
