more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 20499

[filed under theme 24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 5. Democracy / b. Consultation ]

Full Idea

Condorcet proved that provided people have a better than even chance of getting the right answer, and that they vote for their idea of the common good, then majority decisions are an excellent way to get the right result.

Gist of Idea

Condorcet proved that sensible voting leads to an emphatically right answer

Source

Jonathan Wolff (An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) [2006], 3 'Voting')

Book Ref

Wolff,Jonathan: 'An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev)' [OUP 2006], p.75


A Reaction

[compressed] The point is that collective voting magnifies the result. If they tend to be right, the collective view is super-right. But if they tend towards the wrong, the collective view goes very wrong indeed. History is full of the latter.


The 32 ideas from 'An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev)'

A realistic and less utopian anarchism looks increasingly like liberal democracy [Wolff,J]
It is hard for anarchists to deny that we need experts [Wolff,J]
Human beings can never really flourish in a long-term state of nature [Wolff,J]
Collective rationality is individuals doing their best, assuming others all do the same [Wolff,J]
Following some laws is not a moral matter; trivial traffic rules, for example [Wolff,J]
For utilitarians, consent to the state is irrelevant, if it produces more happiness [Wolff,J]
Social contract theory has the attracton of including everyone, and being voluntary [Wolff,J]
Maybe voting in elections is a grant of legitimacy to the winners [Wolff,J]
A system of democracy which includes both freedom and equality is almost impossible [Wolff,J]
Democracy expresses equal respect (which explains why criminals forfeit the vote) [Wolff,J]
Democracy has been seen as consistent with many types of inequality [Wolff,J]
A true democracy could not tolerate slavery, exploitation or colonialism [Wolff,J]
How can dictators advance the interests of the people, if they don't consult them about interests? [Wolff,J]
Political equality is not much use without social equality [Wolff,J]
Occasional defeat is acceptable, but a minority that is continually defeated is a problem [Wolff,J]
'Separation of powers' allows legislative, executive and judicial functions to monitor one another [Wolff,J]
We can see the 'general will' as what is in the general interest [Wolff,J]
We should decide whether voting is for self-interests, or for the common good [Wolff,J]
Condorcet proved that sensible voting leads to an emphatically right answer [Wolff,J]
If natural rights are axiomatic, there is then no way we can defend them [Wolff,J]
Standard rights: life, free speech, assembly, movement, vote, stand (plus shelter, food, health?) [Wolff,J]
If rights are natural, rather than inferred, how do we know which rights we have? [Wolff,J]
Liberty principles can't justify laws against duelling, incest between siblings and euthanasia [Wolff,J]
Utilitarians argue for equal distribution because of diminishing utility of repetition [Wolff,J]
Difference Principle: all inequalities should be in favour of the disadvantaged [Wolff,J]
Utilitarianism probably implies a free market plus welfare [Wolff,J]
Political choice can be by utility, or maximin, or maximax [Wolff,J]
Market prices indicate shortages and gluts, and where the profits are to be made [Wolff,J]
Utilitarians might say property ownership encourages the best use of the land [Wolff,J]
Either Difference allows unequal liberty, or Liberty makes implementing Difference impossible [Wolff,J]
Rights and justice are only the last resorts of a society, something to fall back on [Wolff,J]
Should love be the first virtue of a society, as it is of the family? [Wolff,J]