Rephrase questions+answers to use the Kesselman list of estimative words

Humans actually SUCK at deciding what they agree with (even when the claim they do), agreement seems like just a function derived from intuitive likelihood/probability assessments.

We actually lack anything numerical which has a relationship to real-life processes which maps to "agreement phrases", but we do have something like that for likelihood/probability:

http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/wp-content/uploads/v32n5p167-168.pdf

https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/55739/kesselman_thesis_final.pdf

(Note however that actually, Kesselman didn't exactly distinguish between likelihood and probability, although one definitely should:

https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/2641/what-is-the-difference-between-likelihood-and-probability

However, that seems not so bad.)

As an example, a statement like:

"Oppression by corporations is more of a concern than oppression by governments."

Becomes, for example:

"How likely does it seem that oppression by corporations posses more of a concern than oppression by governments?"

Note: Rephrasing the question like that seems to immediately reveal various problems with the original question! So, It'd probably end up better to split up the question into many more, for example:

"How likely does oppression by corporations seem?"
"How likely does oppression by governments seem?"
"How likely would oppression by corporations affect you?"
"How likely would oppression by government affect you?"

Bonus: If you do it that way, you unmask the link between socio-economic status and political orientation...