Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

news.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 162 posts

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#21

Post by shingen »

3pt14159 wrote: post #15
shingen wrote: post #11

Constitutional Republic yes, Democracy no. Democracy isn't desirable. Mob rule is a terrible system of government. Democracy != voting; Democracy != freedom. America and many other systems have long since proven that freedom through constitutional protections with representative government does flourish. Those systems specifically flourish by protecting the weak from the powerful, the minority from the majority. The…

What about Peter Thiel wanting to make a sea-based libertarian country that doesn't have a democracy because people arn't smart enough to keep it libertarian? (Granted, they could leave by relocating somewhere else, but that is true of most countries anyways.)

Anytime someone lays out an argument by stating that some other group of people isn't intelligent enough to self govern, you should be suspicious of the character and intentions of the person making that argument.

Whether that applies to Thiel or not I have no clue, I haven't seen all his statement on the libertarian colony proposal (I've just seen brief discussions on it).

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#22

Post by sidww2 »

3pt14159 wrote: post #15
shingen wrote: post #11

Constitutional Republic yes, Democracy no. Democracy isn't desirable. Mob rule is a terrible system of government. Democracy != voting; Democracy != freedom. America and many other systems have long since proven that freedom through constitutional protections with representative government does flourish. Those systems specifically flourish by protecting the weak from the powerful, the minority from the majority. The…

What about Peter Thiel wanting to make a sea-based libertarian country that doesn't have a democracy because people arn't smart enough to keep it libertarian? (Granted, they could leave by relocating somewhere else, but that is true of most countries anyways.)

Not true. Immigration laws are a huge barrier, an insurmountable one for some.

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#23

Post by btilly »

This is what happens when one person writes an article, and another writes a link bait title.

Here is the concise version. The well-known Dunning-Kruger effect says that the less competent people are, the less they are able to recognize competence. Someone named Mato Nagel used this as the basis of a toy computer model of democracy. The result of his simulations is that the leaders selected by democracy are only slightly above average.

Of course there has been no testing of how accurate this model is. It is just a toy, and appropriate skepticism should be shown.

However I wouldn't say that evidence is against particularly against his conclusion. For instance 3 of the 4 remaining Republican candidates for President actively disbelieve the scientific consensus on topics such as evolution and global warming. (The exception is Mitt Romney, and even he is not convinced enough about global warming to say that we should spend any money on the issue.) Conversely surveys of Democrats find that most fail to accept basic economic theory on a number of subjects. For instance economists broadly agree that rent control decreases the supply of rental housing, but in surveys the majority of Democrats think that this is wrong.

I could start a debate by multiplying examples of widespread misconception on both sides, but these two are enough to support my point. My point is that it is easy to demonstrate that someone who actually understands and supports the best view of the world that experts from different fields have come to would be totally unelectable. That person might run the country very well, but will never, ever be selected by a democratic process.

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#24

Post by btilly »

atakan_gurkan wrote: post #13

I am surprised that a normal distribution was used for the distribution of "leadership skills". I imagine this could be similar to income distribution which has fat tails. I wonder if the result would change if such a distribution was used.

As long as you maintain the assumption that you cannot recognize relative abilities of better leaders than yourself, the result will remain the same.

If you relax that assumption even slightly (thus you do not reliably recognize relative abilities, but you tend to prefer the better leader), then the conclusion will change dramatically.

That is why this is a toy model. And people should not give it much weight.

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#26

Post by JumpCrisscross »

3pt14159 wrote: post #12

Democracy is also the only way to effectively stop armed revolutions. From Ron Paul to Che, the entire spectrum says "no" to armed resistance until all democratic means are exhausted.

Has a shockingly horrible track record as the "only way" to stop armed revolution

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#27

Post by chernevik »

The point of electoral government is people's right to govern themselves, not the superiority of their decisions.

In the U.S. we mediate "democracy" through a republican government of divided and checked powers to guard against the dangers of any unified and unchecked political power. But the point of all that is to secure that right to self-government, not thwart it.

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#28

Post by JumpCrisscross »

btilly wrote: post #23

This is what happens when one person writes an article, and another writes a link bait title. Here is the concise version. The well-known Dunning-Kruger effect says that the less competent people are, the less they are able to recognize competence. Someone named Mato Nagel used this as the basis of a toy computer model of democracy. The result of his simulations is that the leaders selected by democracy are only slig…

Original article is less Yahoo! http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/2191-people-smart-democr...

Re: People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say

#30

Post by d4nt »

btilly wrote: post #23

This is what happens when one person writes an article, and another writes a link bait title. Here is the concise version. The well-known Dunning-Kruger effect says that the less competent people are, the less they are able to recognize competence. Someone named Mato Nagel used this as the basis of a toy computer model of democracy. The result of his simulations is that the leaders selected by democracy are only slig…

In certain other countries the majority would find the "average American voters'" perspective on issues like economics or climate change quite strange. I can think of countries where there seems to be an almost universal acceptance of global warming but a poor acceptance of free market principles, for example.

My hypothesis is that in the long run education systems have a big impact on what average voters think; and that America's High School system isn't very strong on the scientific method. That's not to say it's all bad. I think it is very strong on creating a sense of national identity, something the UK system seems quite poor on.

Post reply on HN