Chambers wrote:
> Shay wrote:
>> OK, I'll re-word it:
>> In a pure Democracy, The group doing the judging will act in its 
>> majority's *perceived* best interest. Identical meaning to my first 
>> (scratch that -- several) descriptions of the situation.
> 
> I still don't see how you can assume that.  Sure, it's likely, but it's 
> not guaranteed, and it's only an assumption.
> 
>> Admittedly, there are a *few* exceptions. Occasionally one hen manages 
>> to cajole two foxes into sparing her life -- for a day. Other times, 
>> the majority will help one minority, if this can be done with no 
>> perceived cost to themselves, at the expense of another.
> 
> You're assuming that the majority will always be comprised more of 
> narcissists than philanthropists.  I'd be interested if anyone's ever 
> done a study on the popularity of either ideal, but you have to at least 
> admit that you're making an unsubstantiated assumption.
> 
> ...Chambers

Assumption, yes. Those are made when setting policy. Unsubstantiated, 
no. I lock my front door because I make the assumption that my getting 
robbed is more likely than some kind stranger entering my house and 
leaving a bag of gold coins on my pillow.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message